Why the study?
The study was conducted to identify cost-saving opportunities and implement strategies to promote cost-effective, clinically appropriate use of titratable intravenous antihypertensive agents, specifically clevidipine.
Does a quality improvement initiative reduce medication waste and optimize the use of intravenous clevidipine in patients requiring antihypertensive therapy?
Does a quality improvement initiative reduce medication waste and optimize the use of intravenous clevidipine in patients requiring antihypertensive therapy?
A quality improvement initiative identified significant medication waste with 100-mL clevidipine vials, leading to a switch to 50-mL vials and order set revisions to optimize cost-effective use.
Retrospective data may highlight institutional cost-saving opportunities with clevidipine; leaves open whether strategies generalize or alter outcomes.
PURPOSE: This quality improvement initiative assessed the utilization of clevidipine (Cleviprex) in an institutional setting. The purpose was to identify cost-saving opportunities and implement strategies to promote cost-effective and clinically appropriate use of antihypertensive agents in various clinical scenarios. SUMMARY: This research was a single-center retrospective chart review of patients who received clevidipine from January 1 to August 31, 2023. Patients who were 18 years of age or older and had at least one documented clevidipine administration were included. In the patient population, 70% received clevidipine for a surgical hypertension indication and 30% received it for a medical hypertension indication. Only 18% of patients on clevidipine received concurrent antihypertensive agents, indicating that 82% of patients received clevidipine as first-line treatment. The results also showed significant medication waste when stocking 100-mL vials of clevidipine: less than 5 mL total was administered for 76.9% of the vials used in the operating room. In a cost comparison of the institution's titratable intravenous antihypertensives on formulary, the clevidipine 100-mL vial was the most expensive agent. A 2-phase approach to reduce medication waste and overall medication use was implemented. During phase 1, the clevidipine inventory was converted from 100-mL to 50-mL vials to reduce the amount of wasted medication. Order set revisions were carried out in phase 2 to create a guideline-directed, tiered approach to optimize antihypertensive medication therapy. CONCLUSION: A review of clevidipine utilization at the institution identified multiple strategies to reduce use, medication waste, and overall medication cost through appropriate use of intravenous antihypertensive agents.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pajunen et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: