Abstract Background This study aimed to assess PIMsprevalence among frail older participants of The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA), using a newly developed OPTI-3S criteria (criteria for OPTImising medicines by Stopping, Stepping down, or Switching to safer alternatives). Methods All TILDA participants with polypharmacy (i.e. ≥5 medicines) and frailty based on Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) ≥4 were included. PIMswere assessed based on the Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in Frail adults with limited life expectancy (STOPPFrail v2) [1], Poudel et al. algorithm [1], the Norwegian General Practice--Nursing Home criteria (NORGEP-NH) [1], and OPTI-3S. The prevalence of PIMsidentified by each tool was assessed across all frailty levels (CFS ≥4). Poisson regression assessed associations between PIM prevalence and covariates (e.g. medications). Results Most of the study cohort (86.5%, n=504) had at least one PIM identified by any of the four tools. OPTI-3S identified at least one PIM in 62.6% of participants, followed by Poudel’s algorithm (53.9%) and NORGEP-NH (40.5%). OPTI-3S could identify at least one PIM in 97.8% of participants with CFS ≥7, followed by STOPPFrail (88.9%). Overall, 34.8% of prescribed medications were considered to be PIMsThe OPTI-3S list detected more PIMsthan any other tool for all frailty levels (e.g. OPTI-3S, 78.4% vs STOPPFrail, 40.2% in CFS ≥7). Deprescribing all OPTI-3S-defined PIMswould reduce polypharmacy by 20.6% compared to NORGEP-NH (13.3%) and Poudel’s algorithm (12.0%). The most prevalent PIMswere aspirin, benzodiazepines and z-drugs, and antihypertensive medications. The number of medications, anticholinergic burden, and being on specific medications (e.g. aspirin, NSAIDs, benzodiazepines, antidepressants) were significantly associated with increased PIMs. Conclusion OPTI-3S is a useful PIM screening tool in community-dwelling frail older adults, pending further testing in the hospital setting. Reference 1. Anlay, D.Z et al. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2024;90(1):12-106.

Abstract Background No consensus-based criteria set exists specifically for Potentially Inappropriate Medications (PIMs in hospitalised frail older adults. This study aimed to develop the OPTI-3S core criteria for optimising medicines, using a modified Delphi method. Methods The OPTI-3S preliminary list was developed by the research team based on an extensive literature review. A modified Delphi method was conducted to validate a subset (‘core list’) of these preliminary statements. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) was used to differentiate between frailty levels. Eleven practising experts reviewed the core list and full preliminary list in the first round. Participants were asked to rate their agreement with the core list of statements, using a 5-point Likert scale, and suggest additional statements from the full list, or based on their own knowledge. Statements with a median rating of 1 or 2 (i.e. strongly agree or agree) and 75th percentile of 2 or less were included in the final set. Results Nine experts completed the three rounds, after which consensus was reached on the inclusion of 45 statements: 17 statements in the first round, 25 in the second round, and three in the third round. These statements suggest optimising and/or deprescribing antidiabetic agents (n = 7), central nervous system (CNS) medications (n = 7), genito-urinary medications (n = 7), antithrombotic agents (n = 5), statins (n = 4), antihypertensives (n = 4), osteoporosis medications (n = 3), heart failure medications (n = 2), perioperative analgesia (n = 2), diuretics (n = 1), proton-pump inhibitors (n = 1), vitamins and supplements (n = 1), and anticholinergic medications (n = 1). 22 statements apply to a specific CFS frailty level, while the remainder apply to all frail older persons (i.e. CFS of 4 or more). Conclusion: The literature- and consensus- based OPTI-3S core criteria comprise 45 statements relating to PIMsand suggest preferential medications in hospitalised frail older adults. The OPTI-3S criteria may be a useful guide for medication optimisation in frail older people.

Abstract Background The OPTI-3S criteria comprise newly developed consensus-based statements identifying potentially inappropriate medications for hospitalised frail older adults. This study assessed the inter-rater reliability of the OPTI-3S core list. Methods Data were collated from ten patient cases in the publicly archived ‘The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing’ (TILDA) dataset (Wave 3). Five healthcare professionals assessed medication appropriateness across the cases according to the OPTI-3S statements, indicating the applicable statement(s). Their assessments were compared against a ‘Gold Standard (GS) assessment’ consisting of a combined assessment of a research team member and a clinically experienced academic researcher, who independently assessed the medications’ appropriateness. Concordance between the GS rating and other raters was assessed by kappa statistics. Major discrepancies were identified when a rater applied a statement >2 times more or less frequently than GS [1]. Results The ten patients’ median age was 74 (Interquartile Range: 70–80) years, and 40% were female. The median (IQR) number of medications was 10 (9–12). Cohen’s kappa coefficient ranged from 0.65 to 0.86, indicating substantial to perfect interrater reliability when agreement was measured between the GS rating and any other rater. The overall mean (95% CI) Fleiss kappa coefficient between all raters was 0.67 (0.65,0.69), indicating substantial interrater reliability. The mean Fleiss kappa coefficient (95% CI) between the GS rating and geriatricians was 0.63 (0.60, 0.67). A good Fleiss kappa coefficient of 0.81 (0.75, 0.86) was found between the GS rating and pharmacists. Major discrepancies in applying seven statements were noted between the GS rating and three raters. Three of these statements were misinterpreted, indicating revised wording is needed. Conclusion The OPTI-3S core list shows substantial inter-rater reliability between experts with no previous experience using it. However, further testing with a larger number of clinical cases and raters is required.

Abstract Background Falls are prevalent in older adults and can be associated with medication use. Pharmacists play a role in deprescribing Fall Risk Increasing Drugs (FRIDs) and fall prevention. The aim of this study was to explore the factors that prevent or influence the process of deprescribing of FRIDs in older adults, from a pharmacist’s point of view. Methods Individual online semi-structured interviews, involving clinical pharmacists (CPs) who work with older adults in hospitals, were conducted. The interviews were steered by an interview guide based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and interviews continued until saturation. The transcripts were coded using NVivo 12. Challenges and enablers were matched with possible behavioural change techniques, to identify potential future intervention strategies. Results Twelve senior CPs participated in the study (11 female and 1 male; years of practice range 5–30 years). Common challenges included: deprescribing FRIDs not being prioritised by medical teams; medication review is time-consuming; written recommendations to doctors not always read/actioned; fear of withdrawal symptoms; and follow up on patients after discharge is difficult. Deprescribing enablers included: building good team relationships, the belief that medication review is a shared responsibility, verbal being the most effective method of communication, medication review being a core part of pharmacists’ workload, and having the opportunity to review medication and monitor during the inpatient stay. Conclusion Work environment challenges and concerns about safety after discharge were considered significant barriers to deprescribing FRIDs in hospitals. Involving pharmacists in multidisciplinary teams in hospitals may facilitate deprescribing.

Abstract Background Some medicines are associated with falls in older adults and have been classified as Fall-Risk Increasing Drugs (FRIDs). Deprescribing FRIDs is one of several possible preventive measures to reduce falls risk [1]. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore the barriers and facilitators to doctors deprescribing FRIDs in hospitals. Methods Doctors, who were experienced in caring for older patients, were interviewed individually, directed by an interview guide, at a large teaching hospital. Thematic analysis of transcribed audio recordings was undertaken in NVivo 12. Results A total of eighteen doctors participated in the study. Barriers and facilitators were classified into three categories: factors related to the care setting, to doctors and to patients. Incomplete patient medical records, limited time during inpatient stay, poor communication between care providers, and difficulties following up patients after discharge were major barriers to deprescribing in hospital. Doctors’ barriers included concerns about consequences and reluctance changing medications initiated by other prescribers. Acute illness or resistance to change were patient-related barriers to deprescribing. Facilitators included doctors’ awareness of the importance of deprescribing FRIDs, the ability to monitor patients during their inpatient stay, the use of electronic medical records, and support from other healthcare professionals e.g. clinical pharmacists. Conclusion Deprescribing FRIDs in older adults is challenging. Interventions based on identified facilitators, such as improved communication between prescribers, enhanced documentation using electronic medical records, and the support of team members with expertise in medication review, might enhance the feasibility of deprescribing. Reference 1. Seppala LJ et al. EuGMS Task and Finish group on Fall-Risk-Increasing Drugs (FRIDs): Position on Knowledge Dissemination, Management, and Future Research. Drugs Aging. 2019; 36(4): 299–307.

Abstract Background Few assessment criteria exist for Potentially Inappropriate Medications (PIMs) in the hospital setting. This study aims to develop the preliminary statements of OPTI-3S, criteria for optimising medicines by stopping, stepping down or switching to safer alternatives. These are designed to be of value to clinical practitioners in the routine care of hospitalised, frail older adults. Methods A systematic literature review was conducted in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE and Scopus (2010-2021). Search terms included the concepts of inappropriate prescribing, deprescribing and the target population (e.g. older, frail, hospitalized). This was supplemented with a PubMed focused search (2010-2021) using key words pertaining to the index diseases/conditions or inappropriate medications. The structured reviews included clinical based guidelines, PIMs lists, systematic/non-systematic reviews, or clinical/observational trials that assessed safe and/or effective use of medications in older adults. The preliminary statements were then drafted based on the available relevant evidence. Results Searches yielded ~1500 articles. These were included in structured reviews, yielding a total of 109 initial statements across seven physiological systems, and one patient-centred point of care (perioperative care). In addition to detailed PIMs statements (n=98), 11 statements address clinically important Potential Prescribing Omissions (PPOs) (e.g. anticoagulant underdosing) and altered blood pressure and glycaemic targets. Uniquely for criteria of this kind, 23 statements suggest PIMs be considered based on the different frailty levels, according to the Clinical Frailty Scale. 11/98 PIMs statements concern prescribing cascades and suggest tapering regimens for six inappropriate medication classes (e.g. antipsychotics, benzodiazepines). Several statements address medication appropriateness in other frailty related circumstances (e.g. non-compliance, overlapping co-morbidities, feeding tube incompatibility, pill burden/ polypharmacy). Conclusion Literature provides a large body of evidence to support prescribing optimization. This has been distilled into consensus-based statements, which should guide hospital-based health care professionals caring for frail older adults.

Falls can lead to hospitalisation and death in older people. Polypharmacy is a major risk factor, and deprescribing fall-risk increasing drugs (FRIDs) is one of several possible important preventive measures. The objective of this study was to explore the factors that influence doctors when deprescribing FRIDs in a hospital setting. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with consultant geriatricians and hospital doctors experienced in dealing with patients aged 65 years or older, at a large academic teaching hospital ( 1000 beds), Dublin, Ireland. The interviews were directed by an interview guide and audio recorded and transcribed verbatim, with subsequent thematic analysis in NVivo 12 software. A total of 18 participants were interviewed. Barriers to deprescribing included: insufficient time, incomplete patient records, changing medications initiated by other specialists and difficulties following up patients after discharge. Facilitators included: enhanced documentation through electronic patient records, the support of other healthcare professionals such as clinical pharmacists, and patients’ engagement, which is considered essential for the success of the deprescribing process’s outcome. Deprescribing FRIDs in older adults in the hospital setting is challenging. Implementation of the process in practice requires combined effort from stakeholders to tackle everyday work environment challenges. Future studies are required examining the clinical effect of the suggested interventions and exploring patients' involvement in deprescribing decisions.

Abstract Background Formal consensus development methods are widely employed to develop inappropriate medication assessment criteria for older adults. However, standards for conducting and reporting these methods are lacking. This study aims to summarise findings on consensus attainment across published explicit criteria. Methods A systematic literature review of criteria for assessing inappropriate medications in older adults was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE and Scopus (1991 to 2020). Search terms pertained to the concepts of inappropriate prescribing, criteria development/validation, and older patients (aged 65 years or more). Articles were included for the current subanalysis if they represented a consensus based explicit list, assessing appropriateness of medications in older adults. Results From 73 tools identified in the systematic review, 58 tools (79%) had been developed and/or validated by formal consensus methods. 51 criteria sets were reported as having been developed using Delphi (n = 30) and modified Delphi (n = 21) methods. However, most (29/30) of the reported Delphi methodologies had actually been modified by introducing an initial literature-based questionnaire. The criteria for achieving consensus between experts were pre-specified for 42 criteria sets, while the remainder did not report or prespecify consensus definitions. Where available, consensus definitions varied considerably. Arbitrary levels of proximity to a central tendency (e.g. mean +/− 95% confidence interval, median +/− interquartile range) defined consensus in 22 criteria. Seven more criteria followed the RAND/UCLA consensus definition (i.e. three-point region containing the median) (1). Only one set addressed consistency of agreement between rounds. Likert scales or categories for ranking ranged from three-point to 100-point scales. Conclusion The development and reporting of formal consensus-based criteria varies substantially, particularly in distinguishing between Delphi methods and their modifications. This highlights the need for standards for conducting and reporting consensus attainment. 1. Fitch K, Bernstein SJ, Aguilar MD, et al. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User’s Manual: RAND Corporation, 2001.

Objectives: This report describes the design and ongoing implementation of online patient-facing experiences within an undergraduate pharmacy programme, redesigned from classroom activities due to the SARS CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: Two patient-facing experiences were pre-recorded for sharing with students online in the academic year 2020-21. Live webinars with the patients will accommodate questions and answers. Aligned case-based workshops have been redesigned from in-class activities to online workshops. Stufflebeam’s CIPP model of evaluation has been employed as an overall framework of evaluation. Roddy’s ‘four pillars’ for student success in online teaching were used to evaluate the online component. The perspectives of two participating patients regarding the online experience were obtained through semi-structured telephone interviews using suggested discussion themes. Results: Classroom-based patient-facing experiences in both cardiology and diabetes have been redesigned for an online format. Potential problems and resolutions were identified against the ‘four pillars’ to support students. Evaluation of patients' perspectives highlighted their motivations for participation and the importance patients place on pharmacists’ communication skills. Student perceptions of all components will be evaluated through anonymous online surveys upon roll-out. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated pedagogical modifications. The educational benefits of patient-facing experiences can continue through online activities, while protecting vulnerable groups.

The design, implementation and evaluation of a year 1 pharmacy-integrated learning component, using the World Health Organisation's (WHO) analgesic ladder as a scaffold for case-based learning, is described. A novel aspect of the integrated component is the mapping of the cases to the national Core Competency Framework (CCF) for Pharmacists in Ireland and to the school's own cross-cutting curricular integration themes. The integrated cases were student led and delivered through peer-to-peer teaching for 68 first-year pharmacy students. The integrated cases mapped strongly to three of the CCF's domains, namely, personal skills, organisation and management skills and supply of medicines. With regard to the school's curricular integrative themes, the cases mapped strongly to the curricular integration themes of professionalism and communications; medicines sourcing, production and use; and safe and rational use of medicines. Highlights from an anonymous online student survey were the recognition by students of the importance of core science knowledge for practice, the enabling of integrated learning and the suitability of the integrated component for entry-level. While a majority of students were found to favour individual work over group work, future iterations will need to consider a greater degree of group work with a view to reducing the volume of content and time required to complete the cases.

This paper describes the design and implementation of elements of an integrated competency-focused pharmacy programme in the School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences (SoPPS), Trinity College Dublin (TCD), Ireland. Following a national review of pharmacy education and training in Ireland in 2010, and subsequent publication of legislation in 2014, the School has implemented a five-year integrated programme of pharmacy education and training, leading to the award of a Master's degree in Pharmacy (M. Pharm.). Curricular integration has been achieved by underpinning the new programme with a national competency framework for pharmacists and through the utilisation of curricular integration themes. Programme integration also encompasses embedded experiential learning placements in Years 2, 4 and 5 of the five-year programme. The new five-year integrated pharmacy programme, which commenced in 2015, replaced the 4 + 1 model of education and training where a four-year Bachelor's degree was followed by a one-year internship, which was a distinct and separate element of the students' training.

BACKGROUND:Guidelines recommend that patients treated with inhalers receive adherence counseling and device training. Digital technologies that assess both inhaler adherence and technique have been developed. Using these technologies community pharmacists, who have regular contact with patients, are well placed to deliver personalized inhaler education. OBJECTIVE:To determine the impact of a pharmacist intervention, informed by digital technology, on inhaler technique and adherence of patients with asthma in the community. METHODS:A cluster randomized, parallel-group, multisite pharmacy study was conducted over 6 months. All study groups had an electronic device (inhaler compliance assessment device) attached to their maintenance inhaler. A biofeedback group received personalized inhaler training informed by data recorded by the device. The demonstration group received inhaler training, by physical demonstration with a placebo inhaler. The control group received usual care. The primary outcome was inhaler adherence, which was classified as "actual adherence" and expressed as the proportion of expected drug accumulation if adherence and technique had been perfect. Secondary outcomes were quality-of-life scores as measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire, symptoms, and exacerbations. RESULTS:A total of 152 participants (n = 74 biofeedback, n = 56 demonstration, and n = 22 control) were recruited. Asthma was the predominant condition among participants (n = 83), with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (n = 55) and asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease overlap also reported (n = 8). In intention-to-treat analysis, adherence in the biofeedback group during month 2 was 62%, 18% higher (95% CI, 6 to 30) than that in the demonstration group (P = .004) and 24% higher (95% CI, 9 to 40) than that in the control group (P = .003). During month 6, adherence was 14% higher (95% CI, -1 to 30; P = .07) in the biofeedback group than in the demonstration group and 31% higher (95% CI, 13 to 48; P = .001) than in the control group. At the end of the study, the biofeedback group had a sustained fall in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire from baseline, -6.1 (95% CI, -9 to -0.4; P = .04) and had significantly improved daily respiratory symptoms. CONCLUSIONS:Community pharmacist-delivered inhaler training informed by a digital technology improved adherence and health status.

Abstract Background Discharge and transfer between healthcare facilities put older adults at risk of medication-related problems and early readmission. This review examined the evidence for pharmacist interventions at discharge and patients’ care quality. Methods Eight databases were searched systematically from inception to date, using the appropriate search strategy for each. A search for grey literature was conducted on eight further websites. No filters (e.g. language/dates) were applied. Only prospective randomized/quasi-randomized controlled studies involving patients > 65 years of both genders, discharged alive from hospital, were included. The criteria outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions formed the basis of the assessment, conducted using RevMan 5.3. Results 9738 articles were obtained: 8120 unique articles after duplicate removal. Following screening, 12 studies were identified for inclusion. Interventions comprised follow up, medication review and patient counselling at discharge. Of these, 10 were delivered by pharmacists alone, while the remainder were delivered by pharmacists within a multidisciplinary team. Outcome measures included readmission rates, length of stay, medication adherence and care quality. Nine studies showed significant improvements over standard care, e.g. a decrease in hospital admissions (0.68 OR, p=0.002), improved compliance (P<0.001) and a 47% reduction in emergency department visits (95% CI, 0.37-0.75). However, three studies did not report positive results: Two reported non-significant improvement but the third reported poorer readmission rates. Risk of bias was low but the high baseline standard of care reduced the scope for improvement in two of these studies. Conclusion The review summarizes pharmacist interventions’ efficacy and their effect on care quality indicators where possible. The majority of interventions at discharge significantly enhanced patients’ care quality. The findings should prove valuable to decision-makers when planning or improving discharge and post-discharge services.

Objectives:To develop a pharmacokinetic model describing total and unbound teicoplanin concentrations in patients with haematological malignancy and to perform Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate target attainment of unbound trough concentrations with various dose regimens.Methods:This was a hospital-based clinical trial (EudraCT 2013-004535-72). The dosing regimen was 600/800 mg q12h for three doses then 600/800 mg daily. Serial total and unbound teicoplanin concentrations were collected. Maximum protein binding was estimated from serum albumin concentration. Population pharmacokinetic analyses and Monte Carlo simulations were conducted using Pmetrics®. Target total and unbound trough concentrations were ≥20 and ≥1.5 mg/L, respectively.Results:Thirty adult patients were recruited with a mean (SD) bodyweight of 69.1 (15.8) kg, a mean (SD) CLCR of 72 (41) mL/min and a median (IQR) serum albumin concentration of 29 (4) g/L. A three-compartment complex binding pharmacokinetic model best described the concentration-time data. Total and unbound teicoplanin concentrations were related by serum albumin concentration and a dissociation constant. CLCR and bodyweight were supported as covariates for CL and volume of the central compartment, respectively. Dosing simulations showed that high CLCR was associated with reduced probability of achieving target total and unbound trough concentrations. Low serum albumin concentration was associated with a reduced probability of attaining target total but not unbound trough concentrations. A method to estimate the unbound teicoplanin concentration from the measured total concentration at different serum albumin concentration was demonstrated.Conclusions:Standard teicoplanin dosing regimens should be used with caution in patients with haematological malignancy. Bodyweight, CLCR and serum albumin concentration are important considerations for appropriate dosing.

The AMCP Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting 2018 in Boston, Massachusetts, is expected to attract more than 3,800 managed care pharmacists and other health care professionals who manage and evaluate drug therapies, develop and manage networks, and work with medical managers and information specialists to improve the care of all individuals enrolled in managed care programs. The AMCP Abstracts program provides a forum through which authors can share their insights and outcomes of advanced managed care practice. Abstracts are presented as posters on Wednesday, April 25, from 12:30 pm to 2:30 pm. Posters will also be displayed on Tuesday, April 24, from 5:45 pm to 7:30 pm, and on Thursday, April 26, from 9:30 am to 11:00 am. Podium presentations for the Platinum award-winning abstracts are Thursday, April 26, from 8:00 am to 9:15 am. Professional abstracts that have been reviewed are published in the Journal of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy's Meeting Abstracts supplement.

ABSTRACT The objective of this study was to explore the following aspects of teicoplanin use in patients with hematological malignancy: early attainment of target trough concentrations with current high-dose teicoplanin regimens, variability in unbound teicoplanin fractions, factors associated with observed total and unbound trough concentrations, efficacy and toxicity, and renal function estimation. This was a single-center, prospective study. Samples for determination of trough concentrations were taken on days 3, 4, 7, and 10. Total and unbound teicoplanin concentrations were determined using validated high-performance liquid chromatography methods. Regression analyses were used to identify the factors associated with the trough concentration. Thirty teicoplanin-treated adults with hematological malignancy were recruited. Despite the use of dosages higher than the conventional dosages, the proportions of patients with a trough concentration of ≥20 mg/liter at 48 h and at 72 h were 16.7% and 37.9%, respectively. Renal function was significantly negatively associated with total trough concentrations at 48 h and 72 h (P < 0.05). For an average hematological malignancy patient (creatinine clearance = 70 ml/min), sequential loading doses of at least 12 mg/kg of body weight may be needed to achieve early adequate exposure. In the absence of measured creatinine clearance, estimates obtained using the Cockcroft-Gault (total body weight) equation could prove to be an acceptable surrogate. The unbound fractions of teicoplanin were highly variable (3.4 to 18.8%). Higher unbound fractions were observed in patients with low serum albumin concentrations. Teicoplanin was well tolerated. Teicoplanin loading doses higher than those in current use appear to be necessary. Increased dosing is needed in patients with increased renal function. The high variability in protein binding supports the contention for therapeutic drug monitoring of unbound teicoplanin concentrations. (This study has been registered with EudraCT under registration no. 2013-004535-72.)

Objectives: To describe the population pharmacokinetics of teicoplanin in adult patients with haematological malignancies receiving higher than standard doses, and to perform Monte Carlo simulations to determine dosing regimens associated with optimal teicoplanin concentrations.Methods: This was a hospital-based clinical trial (EudraCT 2013-004535-72). Nine blood samples were collected on Day 3, plus single trough samples on Days 7 and 10, and 24 and 48 hours after the last dose. Teicoplanin minimum inhibitory concentrations were determined for Gram-positive isolates from study patients. Population pharmacokinetic analyses and Monte Carlo dosing simulations were undertaken using Pmetrics.Results: Thirty adult haematological malignancy patients were recruited with a mean (SD) loading dose, age, total body weight, and creatinine clearance of 9.5 (1.9) mg/kg, 63 (12) years, 69.1 (15.8) kg, and 72 (41) mL/min, respectively. A three-compartment linear pharmacokinetic model best described the teicoplanin concentration data. Covariates supported for inclusion in the final model were creatinine clearance for clearance and total body weight for volume of the central compartment. The median (IQR) area under the concentration-time curve from 48 to 72 hours (AUC(48-72h)) was 679 (319) mg.h/L. There was a strong correlation between the AUC(48-72h) and trough concentration at 72 hours (Pearson correlation coefficient 0.957, p < 0.001). Dosing simulations showed that administration of five loading doses at 12-hourly intervals, stratified by total body weight and creatinine clearance, increased the probability of achieving target concentrations within 72 hours.Conclusions: To increase the number of patients achieving optimal teicoplanin concentrations an individualized dosing approach, based on body weight and creatinine clearance, is recommended. (C) 2017 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.