The Annals Take our Readership Survey!
home help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


The Annals of Pharmacotherapy: Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 219-223.
© 1996 Harvey Whitney Books Company.
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
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
Right arrow Articles Ahead of Print
Right arrow [Order Reprint]
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mlynarek, M.
Right arrow Articles by Zarowitz, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mlynarek, M.
Right arrow Articles by Zarowitz, B.


Research Articles

Predicting unbound phenytoin concentrations in the critically ill neurosurgical patient

ME Mlynarek, EL Peterson, and BJ Zarowitz

OBJECTIVE: To assess the correlation of measured unbound phenytoin concentration (dphF) to estimated unbound concentration (dphEF) using the Sheiner-Tozer equation in critically ill patients in the neurosurgical intensive care unit. DESIGN: The dphF and total phenytoin (dphT) trough serum concentrations were measured during the first week of therapy in 17 consecutive patients with albumin concentrations less than 3.5 g/dL. Serum albumin concentrations were measured within 24 hours of serum phenytoin concentration measurement. SETTING: A university-affiliated urban teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: The study population consisted of 17 neurosurgical patients who were at least 18 years old. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The predictability of the Sheiner-Tozer equation was tested by measuring dphF, dphT, and serum albumin concentrations. Measured phenytoin concentrations were compared with phenytoin concentrations calculated from the Sheiner-Tozer equation. To estimate correlation between variables linear regression was calculated. Mean absolute value of error and mean error were estimated to assess precision and bias between measures, respectively. RESULT: The mean +/- SD dphT was 13.05 +/- 5.15 mu g/mL. The measured dphF was 1.89 +/- 0.80 compared with 2.00 +/- 0.8 mu g/mL for the dphEF (NS). Regression analysis for dphEF versus dphF revealed a significant correlation (r2 = 0.94, p = 0.001). The mean absolute value of error for the Sheiner-Tozer equation to predict dphEF was 0.167, which was 9% of the mean value of dphEF (1.89). CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that, in this population, the Sheiner-Tozer estimate of dphEF provides an unbiased, precise clinical estimate of dphF in patients for whom measured dphF is unavailable or impractical.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Pharmacy PracticeHome page
U. Idrees and M. Londner
Pharmacotherapy Overview of Seizure Management in the Adult Emergency Department
Journal of Pharmacy Practice, October 1, 2005; 18(5): 394 - 411.
[Abstract] [PDF]




homecopy help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
Copyright © 1996 by Harvey Whitney Books Company.