Acetaminophen overdose is one of the most common causes of acute hepatic failure in the developed world. There is strong evidence for N-acetylcysteine (NAC) as a safe and effective antidote for acetaminophen toxicity. However, there is less clarity in the management of massive overdoses (acute, single ingestions > 500  mg/kg with 4-hour equivalent concentrations ~6000 μmol/L) which are often associated with metabolic acidosis and multiorgan dysfunction. In such ingestions, the role of adjuvant treatments such as fomepizole and extracorporeal removal is unclear. We present a case of a 20-year-old female presenting with an acute ingestion of over 120 grams (1764.7 mg/kg) and an acetaminophen concentration of 5880 μmol/L who developed refractory shock, decreased level of consciousness, and metabolic acidosis requiring mechanical ventilation and vasopressor support. She was treated with gastric decontamination with activated charcoal, IV NAC, fomepizole, and hemodialysis. The patient had complete clearance of acetaminophen by 32 hours after presentation and normalization of her acid base and hemodynamic status without any organ failure. This case highlights the potential benefit of a triple strategy of NAC, fomepizole, and early hemodialysis in massive acetaminophen overdose, potentially sparing complications of prolonged intubation and ICU hospitalization.

Background Antipsychotic medications do not alter the incidence or duration of delirium, but these medications are frequently prescribed and continued at transitions of care in critically ill patients when they may no longer be necessary or appropriate. Objective The purpose of this study was to identify and describe relevant domains and constructs that influence antipsychotic medication prescribing and deprescribing practices among physicians, nurses, and pharmacists that care for critically ill adult patients during and following critical illness. Design We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with critical care and ward healthcare professionals including physicians, nurses, and pharmacists to understand antipsychotic prescribing and deprescribing practices for critically ill adult patients during and following critical illness. Participants Twenty-one interviews were conducted with 11 physicians, five nurses, and five pharmacists from predominantly academic centres in Alberta, Canada, between July 6 and October 29, 2021. Main Measures We used deductive thematic analysis using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify and describe constructs within relevant domains. Key Results Seven TDF domains were identified as relevant from the analysis: Social/Professional role and identity; Beliefs about capabilities; Reinforcement; Motivations and goals; Memory, attention, and decision processes; Environmental context and resources; and Beliefs about consequences. Participants reported antipsychotic prescribing for multiple indications beyond delirium and agitation including patient and staff safety, sleep management, and environmental factors such as staff availability and workload. Participants identified potential antipsychotic deprescribing strategies to reduce ongoing antipsychotic medication prescriptions for critically ill patients including direct communication tools between prescribers at transitions of care. Conclusions Critical care and ward healthcare professionals report several factors influencing established antipsychotic medication prescribing practices. These factors aim to maintain patient and staff safety to facilitate the provision of care to patients with delirium and agitation limiting adherence to current guideline recommendations.

OBJECTIVES: Antipsychotic medications are frequently prescribed to critically ill patients leading to their continuation at transitions of care thereafter. The aim of this study was to generate evidence-informed consensus statements with key stakeholders on antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing for ICU patients. DESIGN: We completed three rounds of surveys in a National modified Delphi consensus process. During rounds 1 and 2, participants used a 9-point Likert scale (1—strongly disagree, 9—strongly agree) to rate perceptions related to antipsychotic prescribing (i.e., experiences regarding delivery of patient care), knowledge and frequency of antipsychotic use, knowledge surrounding antipsychotic guideline recommendations, and strategies (i.e., interventions addressing current antipsychotic prescribing practices) for antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing. Consensus was defined as a median score of 1–3 or 7–9. During round 3, participants ranked statements on antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing strategies that achieved consensus (median score 7–9) using a weighted ranking scale (0–100 points) to determine priority. SETTING: Online surveys distributed across Canada. SUBJECTS: Fifty-seven stakeholders (physicians, nurses, pharmacists) who work with ICU patients. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Participants prioritized six consensus statements on strategies for consideration when developing and implementing interventions to guide antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing. Statements focused on limiting antipsychotic prescribing to patients: 1) with hyperactive delirium, 2) at risk to themselves, their family, and/or staff due to agitation, and 3) whose care and treatment are being impacted due to agitation or delirium, and prioritizing 4) communication among staff about antipsychotic effectiveness, 5) direct and efficient communication tools on antipsychotic deprescribing at transitions of care, and 6) medication reconciliation at transitions of care. CONCLUSIONS: We engaged diverse stakeholders to generate evidence-informed consensus statements regarding antipsychotic prescribing perceptions and practices that can be used to implement interventions to promote antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing strategies for ICU patients with and following critical illness.

Background Antipsychotic medications are frequently prescribed in acute care for clinical indications other than primary psychiatric disorders such as delirium. Unfortunately, they are commonly continued at hospital discharge and at follow-ups thereafter. The objective of this scoping review was to characterize antipsychotic medication prescribing practices, to describe healthcare professional perceptions on antipsychotic prescribing and deprescribing practices, and to report on antipsychotic deprescribing strategies within acute care. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases from inception date to July 3, 2021 for published primary research studies reporting on antipsychotic medication prescribing and deprescribing practices, and perceptions on those practices within acute care. We included all study designs excluding protocols, editorials, opinion pieces, and systematic or scoping reviews. Two reviewers screened and abstracted data independently and in duplicate. The protocol was registered on Open Science Framework prior to data abstraction (10.17605/OSF.IO/W635Z). Results Of 4528 studies screened, we included 80 studies. Healthcare professionals across all acute care settings (intensive care, inpatient, emergency department) perceived prescribing haloperidol (n = 36/36, 100%) most frequently, while measured prescribing practices reported common quetiapine prescribing (n = 26/36, 76%). Indications for antipsychotic prescribing were delirium (n = 48/69, 70%) and agitation (n = 20/69, 29%). Quetiapine (n = 18/18, 100%) was most frequently prescribed at hospital discharge. Three studies reported in-hospital antipsychotic deprescribing strategies focused on pharmacist-driven deprescribing authority, handoff tools, and educational sessions. Conclusions Perceived antipsychotic prescribing practices differed from measured prescribing practices in acute care settings. Few in-hospital deprescribing strategies were described. Ongoing evaluation of antipsychotic deprescribing strategies are needed to evaluate their efficacy and risk.