Brian L Erstad

Photo of Brian L Erstad

Brian L Erstad

Department Head, Pharmacy Practice-Science
Professor, Pharmaceutical Sciences
Member of the Graduate Faculty
Professor, BIO5 Institute
Primary Department
Pharmacy Practice and Science
Department Affiliations
Pharmacy Practice and Science
BIO5 Institute
Contact
(520) 626-4289
erstad@arizona.edu

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

Camamo, J. M., McCoy, R. H., & Erstad, B. L. (2005). Retrospective evaluation of inhaled prostaglandins in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Pharmacotherapy, 25(2), 184-190.

PMID: 15767234;Abstract:

Study Objectives. To determine whether use of inhaled alprostadil (PGE 1) or epoprostenol (PGI2) significantly improved oxygenation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and to determine whether differences between the two drugs exist with regard to oxygenation, duration of mechanical ventilation and hospitalization, adverse effects, and survival. Design. Retrospective chart review. Setting. A 360-bed tertiary care teaching facility with medical and surgical intensive care units. Patients. Twenty-seven patients admitted to the hospital who received either PGI2 or PGE1 for a primary or secondary diagnosis of ARDS. Measurements and Main Results. Seventeen patients received inhaled PGE 1 and 10 received inhaled PGI2. There were no significant changes in the ratio of arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO 2):fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) and in the PaO 2, from baseline to any time point that was analyzed during treatment, for patients receiving either PGE1 (p=0.2120 and 0.3399, respectively) or PGI2 (p=0.1655 and 0.0784, respectively). Conclusion. No statistically significant improvement in oxygenation was observed in patients receiving either PGE1 or PGI2. In addition, no significant differences were found between the two prostaglandins for the variables studied. Until positive results from large, prospective studies are available, we recommend that these inhaled prostaglandins not be used to treat ARDS.

Camamo, J. M., Weibel, K., O'Keeffe, T., Huckleberry, Y., Kopp, B. J., Diven, C., & Erstad, B. L. (2014). Cost savings with interventions to reduce aerosolized bronchodilator use in mechanically ventilated patients. Journal of critical care, 29(5), 814-6.

The purpose of this evaluation is to describe the cost savings associated with multimodal interventions aimed at reducing aerosolized bronchodilator use in mechanically ventilated patients without adversely affecting costs associated with length of stay (LOS).

Erstad, B. L., Draugalis, J. R., Waldrop, S. M., Scheurer, L., & Namanny, M. D. (1994). Patients' perceptions of increased pharmacy contact. Pharmacotherapy, 14(6 I), 724-728.

PMID: 7885976;Abstract:

This prospective, randomized study was conducted to determine if increased patient contact between pharmacists and patients would result in greater patient awareness and satisfaction with their hospital stay and particularly with pharmacists and pharmacy services. Eligible patients were randomized to receive either the usual pharmacy care with minimum contact with the pharmacist, or expanded services based on increased contact with the pharmacist. A questionnaire was used to determine patient awareness and satisfaction. Statistically significant differences were found between the groups on awareness and satisfaction with pharmacy services scales as well as total scores. Total patient scores were highly reliable, with an α coefficient of 0.87. In addition, comments by patients in the group with increased contact were overwhelmingly positive, in contrast to those receiving usual care. Patients desire and appreciate greater contact with pharmacists.

Find Us On

youtube

Stay Connected

Subscribe to our newsletter