Favipiravir is a repurposed drug to treat coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). Due to a lack of available real-world data, we assessed its effectiveness and safety in moderately to critically ill COVID-19 ...

Urinary tract infections (UTI) are commonly encountered in the emergency department (ED). ED culture follow up is an important tool to provide the appropriate therapy after the identification of the causative pathogen. There is a growing body of evidence for the positive role of pharmacists in following up the ED cultures. The purpose of this study was to compare pharmacist driven urine culture follow ups to the nurse-practitioner (NP) driven follow ups in term of the appropriateness of antibiotic selections in patients with resistant isolates, inappropriately treated asymptomatic bacteriuria, and inappropriately chosen antibiotic. This was a retrospective pre-post intervention study divided into a two group period to compare pharmacist to NP led ED culture follow up interventions. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20 was used for analysis. Student’s t-test was used for continuous variables and Chi-square test/or fisher’s-exact test when appropriate were used for the primary outcome. Fifty-five patients (25.7%) and 102 (34%) met the inclusion criteria in the pharmacist arm and in the NP arm, respectively. Escherichia coli was the most commonly isolated pathogen in both arms. Asymptomatic bacteriuria was often treated in the ED in both groups (45/157, 28.7%) and there were no efforts in discontinuation of antibiotics in these patients. Neither the interventions group nor the no interventions groups were statistically different between the pharmacist and NP arms (P 0.0778), (P 0.797), respectively. No statistically significant difference was observed between pharmacist driven monitoring and NP driven monitoring. In our institution, asymptomatic bacteriuria was commonly treated even in the absence of indications. We recommend that Pharmacists’ roles in the ED cultures follow up be expanded to include antibiotic discontinuation in patients who meet asymptomatic bacteriuria criteria or have confirmed negative urine culture.

Hyperkalemia is a commonly encountered medical problem. The treatment of hyperkalemia involves the use of pharmacological agents with different mechanism of actions. Sodium Polystyrene sulfonate (SPS) is a cation-exchange resin that exchanges sodium for potassium. In 2009, the United States Food and Drug Administration issued warning against the use of SPS with sorbitol due to risk of colonic necrosis. We present a case of SPS induced colonic necrosis in the absence of sorbitol and risk factors deemed to increase risk of colonic necrosis. Here we report a 64-year old male with past medical history of kidney stones who was admitted for treatment of colitis which was complicated by septic shock requiring vasopressors. His course was further complicated by hyperkalemia attributed to acute kidney injury. One dose 30 gm of SPS was administered which normalized his serum potassium. The patient's course was complicated by duodenal ulcer, and colonic perforation. The initial pathology findings of the resected specimen were suggestive of inflammatory bowel disease which resulted in starting patient on mesalamine. The patient then developed fistula which was resected and sent for pathology. SPS induced colonic necrosis was made based on the pathology findings. SPS is commonly used to decrease potassium levels. SPS has been reported to be associated with several gastrointestinal complications. FDA issued warning against the use of SPS in patients at risk for complications. Here we report a case with SPS induced colonic necrosis in the absence of risk factors reported in the literature.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic disease with ever-increasing prevalence worldwide. In our study, we evaluated the prevalence of the risk of developing T2DM in Saudi Arabia and investigated associations between that risk and various sociodemographic characteristics. To those ends, a web-based cross-sectional survey of Saudi nationals without diabetes, all enrolled using snowball sampling, was conducted from January 2021 to January 2022. The risk of developing T2DM was evaluated using a validated risk assessment questionnaire (ARABRISK), and associations of high ARABRISK scores and sociodemographic variables were explored in multivariable logistic regression modeling. Of the 4559 participants, 88.1% were 18 to 39 years old, and 67.2% held a college or university degree. High ARABRISK scores were observed in 7.5% of the sample. Residing in a midsize city versus a large city was associated with a lower ARABRISK risk score (p = 0.007), as were having private instead of governmental insurance (p = 0.005), and being unemployed versus employed (p < 0.001). By contrast, being married (p < 0.001), divorced or widowed (p < 0.001), and/or retired (p < 0.001) were each associated with a higher ARABRISK score. A large representative study is needed to calculate the risk of T2DM among Saudi nationals.

Background: The use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) is controversial for treating COVID-19 patients. We aimed to estimate pooled risks of mortality, disease severity, and hospitalization associated with ACEI/ARB use and stratify them by country and country clusters. Methods: We conducted a search in various databases through 4 July 2020 and then applied random-effects models to estimate pooled risks (OR_p) across stratifications by country cluster. Clusters were chosen to reflect outbreak times (China followed by Korea/Italy, others subsequently) and mobility restrictions (China and Denmark/France/Spain with stricter lockdowns than the UK/US). Results: Overall analysis showed no increase in mortality; however, a statistical increase in mortality was seen in the US/UK cluster with OR_p = 1.28 [95% CI = 1.04; 1.56] and a decrease in China with OR_p = 0.65 [95% CI = 0.43; 0.96] and France with OR = 0.31 [95% CI = 0.14; 0.69]. Severity and hospitalization were not statistically significant in the analysis; however, several associations were seen in specific countries but not in country clusters. Conclusion: The country-cluster meta-analysis provided a reasonable explanation for COVID-19 mortality among ACEI/ARB users. The analysis did not explain differences in severity and suggested the involvement of other factors. Hospitalization findings among ACEI/ARB users may be considered informative as they may have been subjected to clinical decisions and hospital-bed availability.