Dasta Joseph F, Jacobi Judith, Sesti Anne-Marie, McLaughlin Trent P
College of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210-1291, and the Department of Pharmacy, Clarian Health, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Pharmacotherapy. 2006 Jun;26(6):798-805. doi: 10.1592/phco.26.6.798.
To characterize inpatient use of intravenous sedatives in the real-world setting, and to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes when dexmedetomidine was used with midazolam and propofol for select cardiovascular procedures.
12-month retrospective analysis.
An administrative claims database of operational data from a nationally representative sample of 250 medical and surgical hospitals.
Patients who received midazolam plus propofol (9996 patients) or dexmedetomidine, midazolam, plus propofol (356 patients) after cardiac valve or vessel surgery.
The source of patient demographics (e.g., age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index) and outcomes (e.g., charges, length of stay, mortality rate) was the hospital billing claim form. Patients in the dexmedetomidine-midazolam-propofol cohort tended to be younger and male and to have fewer comorbidities than those midazolam-propofol cohort. The primary outcomes for the three-drug cohort showed significant reductions in total charges/patient (approximately $18,000, p<0.05), total hospital length of stay (0.6 days, p<0.0001), days in the intensive care unit or cardiac care unit (3.87 days, p<0.0001), and mortality (2%, p=0.0142). Although pharmacy charges were higher (approximately $4000/patient), lower charges for the intensive care or cardiac care unit, operating room, room and board, and respiratory services were observed in the dexmedetomidinemidazolam-propofol cohort compared with the two-drug cohort. Also, mechanical ventilation was shorter by approximately 0.5 day in the three-drug cohort (p<0.01).
These initial findings of a real-world assessment of dexmedetomidine use with other agents suggest favorable clinical and economic outcomes. Further research through randomized clinical trials of dexmedetomidine is warranted to better understand its optimum patient population, dosage, and the causality of the results, and to confirm the potential clinical and economic benefits observed in our patients.
描述静脉镇静剂在实际临床环境中的住院使用情况,并评估右美托咪定与咪达唑仑和丙泊酚联合用于特定心血管手术时的临床和经济结局。
为期12个月的回顾性分析。
来自250家具有全国代表性的内科和外科医院的运营数据行政索赔数据库。
心脏瓣膜或血管手术后接受咪达唑仑加丙泊酚(9996例患者)或右美托咪定、咪达唑仑加丙泊酚(356例患者)的患者。
患者人口统计学信息(如年龄、性别、查尔森合并症指数)和结局(如费用、住院时间、死亡率)的来源是医院账单索赔表。与咪达唑仑 - 丙泊酚组相比,右美托咪定 - 咪达唑仑 - 丙泊酚组的患者往往更年轻、男性居多且合并症较少。三药联合组的主要结局显示,每位患者的总费用显著降低(约18,000美元,p<0.05),总住院时间缩短(0.6天,p<0.0001),重症监护病房或心脏监护病房住院天数减少(3.87天,p<0.0001),死亡率降低(2%,p = 0.0142)。虽然药房费用较高(约4000美元/患者),但与两药联合组相比,右美托咪定 - 咪达唑仑 - 丙泊酚组在重症监护或心脏监护病房、手术室、食宿和呼吸服务方面的费用较低。此外,三药联合组的机械通气时间缩短约为0.5天(p<0.01)。
这些关于右美托咪定与其他药物联合使用的真实世界评估的初步发现表明,其具有良好的临床和经济结局。有必要通过右美托咪定的随机临床试验进行进一步研究,以更好地了解其最佳患者群体、剂量以及结果的因果关系,并确认在我们的患者中观察到的潜在临床和经济效益。