Am J Health-Syst Pharm
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Order Full text via Infotrieve
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Koch, K.
Right arrow Articles by Taylor, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Koch, K.
Right arrow Articles by Taylor, M.
American Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, Vol 48, Issue 7, 1492-1496
Copyright © 1991 by American Society of Health-System Pharmacists


Articles

Use of ampicillin-sulbactam before and after formulary inclusion

KE Koch and MR Taylor


The use of ampicillin-sulbactam before and after the product was formally placed on a hospital formulary is described. In October 1987 the pharmacy and therapeutics committee at an acute-care institution granted ampicillin-sulbactam temporary formulary inclusion on the condition that its use be audited. Formal inclusion was to be based on the results of this preinclusion audit. A second audit was to be performed if formal inclusion was granted. The data were collated after each audit, and for each patient an infectious-disease consultant proposed an alternative antimicrobial regimen representing what would probably have been prescribed had ampicillin-sulbactam not been available. Sixty-four patients received the product during the six-month preinclusion audit period. Ampicillin-sulbactam was given to 37% of the patients for indications listed in FDA-approved labeling. The dosage was considered appropriate in 88% of the patients. Clinical outcome was considered successful in 84% of the patients who received the product for known infections. Therapy with ampicillin-sulbactam was less expensive (by $4125) in 35 patients and more costly (by $1523) in 29 patients; the projected annual savings were $7805. After formal inclusion on the formulary, ampicillin-sulbactam was prescribed for some 700 patients over a 16-month period. A review in 49 patients showed appropriate indication and dosage for 63% and 84% of the patients, respectively, and an 84% rate of therapeutic success. The extrapolated cost savings were $26,429 per year. After formulary inclusion, the use of ampicillin-sulbactam increased, as did the frequency of its use for indications appearing in FDA-approved labeling.
 






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1991 by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists.