Five-year evolution of drug prescribing in a university adult intensive care unit

Introduction: Drug prescription is difficult in ICUs as prescribers are many, drugs expensive and decisions complex. In our ICU, specialist clinicians (SC) are entitled to prescribe a list of specific drugs, negotiated with intensive care physicians (ICP). The objective of this investigation was to assess the 5-year evolution of quantity and costs of drug prescription in our adult ICU and identify the relative costs generated by ICP or SC. Methods: Quantities and costs of drugs delivered on a quarterly basis to the adult ICU of our hospital between 2004 and 2008 were extracted from the pharmacy database by ATC code, an international five-level classification system. Within each ATC first level, drugs with either high level of consumption, high costs or large variations in quantities and costs were singled out and split by type of prescriber, ICP or SC. Cost figures used were drug purchase prices by the hospital pharmacy. Results: Over the 5-year period, both quantities and costs of drugs increased, following a nonsteady, nonparallel pattern. Four ATC codes accounted for 80% of both quantities and costs, with ATC code B (blood and haematopoietic organs) amounting to 63% in quantities and 41% in costs, followed by ATC code J (systemic anti-infective, 20% of the costs), ATC code N (nervous system, 11% of the costs) and ATC code C (cardiovascular system, 8% of the costs). Prescription by SC amounted to 1% in drug quantities, but 19% in drug costs. The rate of increase in quantities and costs was seven times larger for ICP than for SC (Figure 1 overleaf ). Some peak values in costs and quantities were related to a very limited number of patients. Conclusions: A 5-year increase in quantities and costs of drug prescription in an ICU is a matter of concern. Rather unexpectedly, total costs and cost increases were generated mainly by ICP. A careful follow-up is necessary to try influencing this evolution through an institutional policy co-opted by all professional categories involved in the process.

Patients' understanding of blood tests and attitudes to HIV screening in the emergency department of a Swiss teaching hospital: a cross-sectional observational study.

BACKGROUND: In Switzerland, patients may undergo "blood tests" without being informed what these are screening for. Inadequate doctor-patient communication may result in patient misunderstanding. We examined what patients in the emergency department (ED) believed they had been screened for and explored their attitudes to routine (non-targeted) human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) screening. METHODS: Between 1st October 2012 and 28th February 2013, a questionnaire-based survey was conducted among patients aged 16-70 years old presenting to the ED of Lausanne University Hospital. Patients were asked: (1) if they believed they had been screened for HIV; (2) if they agreed in principle to routine HIV screening and (3) if they agreed to be HIV tested during their current ED visit. RESULTS: Of 466 eligible patients, 411 (88%) agreed to participate. Mean age was 46 ± 16 years; 192 patients (47%) were women; 366 (89%) were Swiss or European; 113 (27%) believed they had been screened for HIV, the proportion increasing with age (p ≤0.01), 297 (72%) agreed in principle with routine HIV testing in the ED, and 138 patients (34%) agreed to be HIV tested during their current ED visit. CONCLUSION: In this ED population, 27% believed incorrectly they had been screened for HIV. Over 70% agreed in principle with routine HIV testing and 34% agreed to be tested during their current visit. These results demonstrate willingness among patients concerning routine HIV testing in the ED and highlight a need for improved doctor-patient communication about what a blood test specifically screens for.