AuthorErstad, Brian L.
Barletta, Jeffrey F.
Killian, Aaron D.
Kramer, Katherine M.
Martin, Steven J.
AffiliationClinical Specialist – Surgery, Department of Pharmacy Practice, Detroit Receiving Hospital, Michigan, USA
Associate Professor, Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, College of Pharmacy, University of Arizona, USA
Professor of Surgery, Chief of the Division of General Surgery, Southern Illinois University, USA
MetadataShow full item record
CitationCritical Care 2002, 6:526-530 (DOI 10.1186/cc1831)
Rights© 2002 Barletta et al., licensee BioMed Central Ltd
Collection InformationThis item is part of the UA Faculty Publications collection. For more information this item or other items in the UA Campus Repository, contact the University of Arizona Libraries at firstname.lastname@example.org.
AbstractBACKGROUND:No surveys of stress ulcer prophylaxis prescribing in the USA havebeen conducted since 1995. Since that time, the most comprehensive meta-analysisand largest randomized study to date concerning stress ulcer prophylaxis havebeen published.RESULTS:Three hundred sixty-eight surveys were sent to all members of theSection of Pharmacy and Pharmacology of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.One hundred fifty-three (42%) surveys were returned. Representatives from 86%of institutions stated that medications for stress ulcer prophylaxis are usedin a majority (>90%) of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU).Twenty-two per cent of institutions have recommendations for both ICU andnon-ICU settings. Fifty-eight per cent of institutions stated that there wasone preferred medication for stress ulcer prophylaxis, and in 77% of thesehistamine-2-antagonists were the most popular.CONCLUSIONS:There are wide variations in prescribing practices for stressulcer prophylaxis. Institutions should consult published literature and usepre-existing guidelines as templates for developing their own guidelines.
VersionFinal published version