Brian L Erstad

Brian L Erstad

Department Head, Pharmacy Practice-Science
Professor, Pharmaceutical Sciences
Member of the Graduate Faculty
Professor, BIO5 Institute
Primary Department
Contact
(520) 626-4289

Work Summary

Brian Erstad’s research interests pertain to critical care medicine with an emphasis on patient safety and related outcomes research.

Research Interest

Brian L. Erstad, PharmD, FCCM, is currently a tenured professor and head of the Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science. He is also a center investigator for the Center for Health Outcomes and PharmacoEconomics Research and a co-director for the Arizona Clinical and Translational Research Graduate Certificate Program. His clinical responsibilities are performed at Banner-University Medical Center Tucson.Dr. Erstad’s research interests pertain to critical care medicine with an emphasis on patient safety and related outcomes research. He has authored more than 150 peer-reviewed articles and book chapters.Dr. Erstad has served on the board of directors of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists and on numerous committees and task forces for other organizations including AHRQ, USP, Society of Critical Care Medicine and the American College of Chest Physicians. He is currently an ad hoc member of the FDA’s Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee, a steering committee member of the United States Critical Illness and Injury Trials (USCIIT) Group, and treasurer of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy.

Publications

Erstad, B. L., Camamo, J. M., Miller, M. J., Webber, A. M., & Fortune, J. (1997). Impacting cost and appropriateness of stress ulcer prophylaxis at a university medical center. Critical Care Medicine, 25(10), 1678-1684.

PMID: 9377882;Abstract:

Objective: To determine the appropriateness and medication cost of stress ulcer prophylaxis before and after a targeted educational intervention. Design: In the preintervention cohort (phase 1), 264 patients were evaluated over 2 months, using stress ulcer prophylaxis guidelines developed by s comprehensive literature search. Targeted educational programs were subsequently used to inform trauma housestaff on appropriate usage of stress ulcer prophylaxis medications with emphasis on using sucralfate. The postintervention cohort (phase 2) involved concurrent evaluation of 279 patients. Length of inappropriate stress ulcer prophylaxis (i.e., did not meet approved guidelines) between phases was com pared using a Student's t- test for independent samples (α = .05). Setting: A 365-bed university medical center. Patients: Patients admitted to any of the intensive care units and all patients who were placed on histamine-2-antagonists or sucralfate for stress ulcer prophylaxis. Interventions: Educational intervention regarding appropriate stress ulcer prophylaxis directed at the trauma service. Measurements and Main Results: Patient demographics in the two phases were similar and there was no difference in the number of patient risk factors for stress-induced bleeding. The mean length of inappropriate stress ulcer prophylaxis was 5.78 ± 4.36 days in phase 1 and 4.66 ± 3.10 days in phase 2 (p .05). Eighty-nine patients in phase 1 received inappropriate stress ulcer prophylaxis for a drug cost of $2,272.00 (mean $25.53 ± 25.52) compared with 90 patients in phase 2 with a drug cost of $1,417.00 (mean $15.75 ± 13.06). Three patients in each phase had clinically important bleeding (hemodynamic compromise or transfusion); all were receiving ranitidine. The mean total cost (fixed and variable) of hospitalization was $69,288.00 and $74,709.00 for the three patients who bled in each phase compared with $19,850.00 and $15,812.00 for all patients admitted to the intensive care unit in phases 1 and 2, respectively. The mean length of hospital stay was 30.00 days and 29.33 days for the three patients who bled in each phase compared with 11.54 days and 10.27 days for all patients admitted to the intensive care unit in phases 1 and 2, respectively. Conclusions: Cost savings are associated with more appropriate stress ulcer prophylaxis. Clinically important bleeding is uncommon but results in prolonged hospital stays and increased costs.

Ashby, D. M., Woods, T. M., Brennan, C., Colgan, K. J., Devereaux, D. S., Erstad, B. L., Ivey, M. F., Phillips, M. S., Puckett, W. H., Senst, B. L., Silvester, J. A., Manasse Jr., H. R., Nolen, A. L., & Schneider, P. J. (2004). Actions of the ASHP Board of Directors - Meeting of April 14-16, 2004. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 61(13), 1400-1401.
Nix, D. E., Matthias, K. R., & Erstad, B. L. (2011). Vancomycin clearance in overweight and obese patients. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 68(19), 1776-1777.
Erstad, B. L., Chopda, S., & Esser, M. J. (1997). Prescribing of analgesics in trauma patients. American Journal of Therapeutics, 4(1), 27-30.

PMID: 10423587;Abstract:

Objective: To evaluate whether initial orders of pain medications by physicians for trauma patients were in accordance with published guidelines. Design: Concurrent, nonrandomized investigation conducted over 4 months. Materials and Methods: All adult trauma patients admitted to the intensive care unit within 12 hours of injury who stayed for at least 1 hour were eligible for study admission. Patients with injuries prohibiting accurate pain assessment (e.g., Glasgow Coma Score 8, spinal cord injury) were excluded. Initial orders for pain medications were compared to published guidelines; correlations between dose and patient demographics were studied. Results: Of the 30 patients enrolled in the study, 83% were prescribed appropriate pain control regimens. The average dose of morphine administered during each of the 8-hour dosing intervals was approximately 12 mg. No relationship was found between patient age, sex, Glasgow Coma Score, and morphine dose; however, there was a positive correlation found between Injury Severity Score and dose. Conclusions: The majority of patients in this investigation were initially prescribed appropriate doses and intervals for pain management.

Erstad, B., & Erstad, B. L. (2004). Cost-effectiveness of proton pump inhibitor therapy for acute peptic ulcer-related bleeding. Critical care medicine, 32(6).

The purpose of this investigation was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of adjunctive oral and intravenous proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapies for patients with acute peptic ulcer-related bleeding of sufficient severity to warrant hospitalization.