A lack of research exploring post-transplant process optimization to reduce readmissions and increasing readmission rates at our center from 2009 to 2013 led to this study, aimed at assessing the effect of patient and process factors on 30-d readmission rates after kidney transplantation. This was a retrospective case-control study in adult kidney transplant recipients. Univariate and multivariate analyses were utilized to assess patient and process determinants of 30-d readmissions. 384 patients were included; 30-d readmissions were significantly associated with graft loss and death (p = 0.001). Diabetes (p = 0.049), pharmacist identification of poor understanding or adherence, and prolonged time on hemodialysis prior to transplant were associated with an increased risk of 30-d readmissions. After controlling for risk factors, readmission rates were only independently predicted by pharmacist identification of patient lack of understanding or adherence regarding post-transplant medications and dialysis exposure for more than three yr (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.10-4.71, p = 0.026 and OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.22, 3.70, respectively), both of which were significantly modified by history of diabetes. Thirty-d readmissions are attributable to both patient and process-level factors. These data suggest that a lack of post-transplant medication knowledge in high-risk patients drives early hospital readmission.

Purpose The development, testing, and preliminary validation of a technology-enabled, pharmacist-led intervention aimed at improving medication safety and outcomes in kidney transplant recipients are described. Summary Medication safety issues, encompassing medication errors (MEs), medication nonadherence, and adverse drug events (ADEs), are a predominant cause of poor outcomes after kidney transplantation. However, a limited number of clinical trials assessing the effectiveness of technology in improving medication safety and outcomes in transplant recipients have been conducted. Through an iterative, evidence-based approach, a technology-enabled intervention aimed at improving posttransplant medication safety outcomes was developed, tested, and preliminarily validated. Early acceptability and feasibility results from a prospective, randomized controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of this system are reported here. Of the 120 patients enrolled into the trial at the time of writing, 60 were randomly assigned to receive the intervention. At a mean ± S.D. follow-up of 5.8 ± 4.0 months, there were 2 patient dropouts in the intervention group, resulting in a retention rate of 98%, which was higher than the expected 90% retention rate. Conclusion The development and deployment of a comprehensive medication safety monitoring dashboard for kidney transplant recipients is feasible and acceptable to patients in the current healthcare environment. An ongoing randomized controlled clinical trial is assessing whether such a system reduces MEs and ADRs, leading to improved patient outcomes.

Because of the complexities associated with anticoagulation in temporary percutaneous ventricular assist device (pVAD) recipients, a lack of standardization exists in their management. This retrospective analysis evaluates current anticoagulation practices at a single center with the aim of identifying an optimal anticoagulation strategy and protocol. Patients were divided into two cohorts based on pVAD implanted (CentriMag (Thoratec; Pleasanton, CA) / TandemHeart (CardiacAssist; Pittsburgh, PA) or Impella (Abiomed, Danvers, MA)), with each group individually analyzed for bleeding and thrombotic complications. Patients in the CentriMag/TandemHeart cohort were subdivided based on the anticoagulation monitoring strategy (activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) or antifactor Xa unfractionated heparin (anti-Xa) values). In the CentriMag/TandemHeart cohort, there were five patients with anticoagulation titrated based on anti-Xa values; one patient developed a device thrombosis and a major bleed, whereas another patient experienced major bleeding. Eight patients received an Impella pVAD. Seven total major bleeds in three patients and no thrombotic events were detected. Based on distinct differences between the devices, anti-Xa values, and outcomes, two protocols were created to guide anticoagulation adjustments. However, anticoagulation in patients who require pVAD support is complex with constantly evolving anticoagulation goals. The ideal level of anticoagulation should be individually determined using several coagulation laboratory parameters in concert with hemodynamic changes in the patient's clinical status, the device, and the device cannulation.

No abstract

These results demonstrated that a straightforward, 5-minute survey completed by renal transplant recipients prior to their clinic visit may be capable of effectively determining those at risk of having six or more DRPs, potentially allowing use as a screening tool for transplant pharmacists' workflow prioritization. External validation is needed before this tool can be used in the outpatient setting.