Premium
Pharmacist‐driven multidisciplinary initiative continuously improves postoperative nausea and vomiting in female patients undergoing abdominal surgery
Author(s) -
Wang Rongrong,
Dong Xihao,
Zhang Xuan,
Gan Shuyuan,
Kong Limin,
Lu Xiaoyang,
Rao Yuefeng
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.622
H-Index - 73
eISSN - 1365-2710
pISSN - 0269-4727
DOI - 10.1111/jcpt.13110
Subject(s) - medicine , nausea , postoperative nausea and vomiting , odds ratio , vomiting , number needed to treat , incidence (geometry) , surgery , anesthesia , relative risk , confidence interval , physics , optics
Abstract What is known and objective The incorrect or insufficient prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is common in practice. A clinical pharmacist‐led guidance team (CPGT) was established and included in general surgery teams. Objective This study aimed to evaluate the effects of the CPGT on the improvement of PONV and prophylaxis administration. Methods A prospective before‐after study was conducted on 156 female patients undergoing abdominal surgery at a Chinese tertiary teaching hospital from December 2016 to December 2017. A total of 82 patients were enrolled in the preintervention period, and 74 patients were included in the post‐intervention period. The CPGT established the evidence‐based criteria for prophylactic anti‐emetic administration and conducted interventions, including a review of medical records, provision of feedback, educational outreach, and dedicated support. Primary outcomes included the incidence of PONV within 24 hours of surgery, administered number of prophylactic anti‐emetics, and accuracy of the timing for prophylactic anti‐emetics. Outcomes were analysed by logistic regression or multivariable linear regression. Results and discussion After intervention, patients reported significantly less PONV (33.78% vs 56.10%; odds ratio [OR]: 0.29; numbers needed to treat [NNT]: 3.47), vomiting (29.73% vs 45.12%; OR: 0.42; NNT: 5.16) and nausea (31.08% vs 56.10%; OR: 0.24; NNT: 3.19) within 24 hours of surgery. The accuracy of the timing for prophylactic anti‐emetics significantly increased (OR: 3.66; P : .003). Anaesthesiologists administered increased numbers of prophylactic anti‐emetics (OR: 5.82; P < .001). The improvement of PONV did not decrease during the four‐month period after intervention ( P : .639). What is new and conclusion The CPGT is a valuable service model to continuously improve PONV and optimize prophylaxis administration.