MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887621150 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v44i6.2803

Stability and Compatibility of Combinations of Hydromorphone and a Second Drug

2018· article· en· W2887621150 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Scott E. Walker, Carlo DeAngelis, John Iazzetta

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntibiotics Pharmacokinetics and Efficacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydromorphoneChemistryCloxacillinChromatographyCefazolinAmpicillinOpioidAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The stability and compatibility of binary combinations of hydromorphone at three concentrations (2, 10 and 40 mg/ml) and seven other medications (ampicillin, cefazolin, ceftazidime, cloxacillin, diazepam, phenytoin and phenobarbital) were evaluated for 24 hours at room temperature. In addition to visual inspection and pH, the concentration of each component in the binary mixture was determined by a stability indicating liquid chromatographic method. Each test was completed at time zero, 4, 8 and 24 hours after mixing equal volumes of each medication. Incompatibilities were observed when equal volumes of hydromorphone were mixed with either diazepam (5 mg/mL), phenobarbital (120 mg/ml) or phenytoin (50 mg/ml). Cefazolin was observed to be incompatible only when concentrations of cefazolin exceeded 200 mg/mL. Cloxacillin was observed to be incompatible with hydromorphone only when cloxacillin had been diluted with 5% dextrose in water (D5W) and the concentration exceeded 24 mg/ml. Cloxacillin is compatible with hydromorphone when an equal volume of a 250 mg/ml solution (reconstituted according to the manufacturer's directions) is mixed with hydromorphone. Ampicillin was observed to be compatible at concentrations of 20 mg/ml (diluted in D5W) and 250 mg/mL, but ampicillin retained more than 90% of the initial concentration for only four hours. Ceftazidime (40 mg/ml in D5W or 250 mg/ml) was physically compatible and chemical stable in the presence of hydromorphone. Hydromorphone was chemically stable in all solutions and never precipitated. RESUME Les stabilites et compatibilites d'associations binaires d'hydromorphone a trois concentrations (2, 10 et 40 mg/ml) et de sept autres medicaments (ampiciline, cefazoline, ceftazidine, cloxacillin, diazepam, phenytoine et phenobarbital) furent evaluees pendant une periode de 24 heures a la temperature de la piece. En plus d'une inspection visuelle et au pH, la concentration de chaque element du melange binaire fut determinee en utilisant la methode d'un solvant chromatographique determinant la stabilite. Chaque examen fut complete aux temps 0, 4, 8 et 24 heures apres avoir melange en volumes egaux chaque medication. Des incompatibilites furent observees lorsque des volumes egaux d'hydromorphone et de diazepam (5 mg/mL), de phenobarbital (l20 mg/ml,) ou de phenytoine (50 mg/mL) furent melanges. Il y eu incompatibilite seulement lorsque les concentrations de cefazoline depassaient 200 mg/mL. La cloxacilline etait incompatible avec l'hydromorphone, seulement quant elle etait diluee dans l'eau avec 5 p.c. de dextrose (D5W) et que la concentration depassait 24 mg/mL. Elle etait compatible avec l’hydromorphone lorsque melangee en volumes egaux d'une solution a 250 mg/mL (reconstituee selon les directives du fabricant). L'ampicilline etait compatible (diluee dans le D5W) a des concentrations de 20 mg/mL et de 250 mg/mL, mais conservait retenu plus de 90 p.c. de la concentration initiale pendant quatre heures seulement. La ceftazidime etait compatible physiquement (40 mg/mL dans D5W ou 250 mg/mL) et chimiquement stable en presence de l'hydromorphone. L’hydromorphone etait stable chimiquement dans toutes solutions et ne precipitait jamais.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital PharmacySame topicAntibiotics Pharmacokinetics and EfficacyFrench-language works237,207