Drug-Drug Interactions and Actual Harm to Hospitalized Patients: A Multicentre Study Examining the Prevalence Pre- and Post-Electronic Medication System Implementation.

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Drug Safety Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-13 DOI:10.1007/s40264-024-01412-w
Ling Li, Jannah Baker, Renee Quirk, Danielle Deidun, Maria Moran, Ahmed Abo Salem, Nanda Aryal, Bethany A Van Dort, Wu Yi Zheng, Andrew Hargreaves, Paula Doherty, Sarah N Hilmer, Richard O Day, Johanna I Westbrook, Melissa T Baysari
{"title":"Drug-Drug Interactions and Actual Harm to Hospitalized Patients: A Multicentre Study Examining the Prevalence Pre- and Post-Electronic Medication System Implementation.","authors":"Ling Li, Jannah Baker, Renee Quirk, Danielle Deidun, Maria Moran, Ahmed Abo Salem, Nanda Aryal, Bethany A Van Dort, Wu Yi Zheng, Andrew Hargreaves, Paula Doherty, Sarah N Hilmer, Richard O Day, Johanna I Westbrook, Melissa T Baysari","doi":"10.1007/s40264-024-01412-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) have potential to cause patient harm, including lowering therapeutic efficacy. This study aimed to (i) determine the prevalence of potential DDIs (pDDIs); clinically relevant DDIs (cDDIs), that is, DDIs that could lead to patient harm, taking into account a patient's individual clinical profile, drug effects and severity of potential harmful outcome; and subsequent actual harm among hospitalized patients and (ii) examine the impact of transitioning from paper-based medication charts to electronic medication management (eMM) on DDIs and patient harms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a secondary analysis of the control arm of a controlled pre-post study. Patients were randomly selected from three Australian hospitals. Retrospective chart review was conducted before and after the implementation of an eMM system, without accompanying clinical decision support alerts for DDIs. Harm was assessed by an expert panel.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1186 patient admissions, 70.1% (n = 831) experienced a pDDI, 42.6% (n = 505) a cDDI and 0.9% (n = 11) an actual harm in hospital. Of 15,860 pDDIs identified, 27.0% (n = 4285) were classified as cDDIs. The median number of pDDIs and cDDIs per 10 drugs were 6 [interquartile range (IQR) 2-13] and 0 (IQR 0-2), respectively. In cases where a cDDI was identified, both drugs were 44% less likely to be co-administered following eMM (adjusted odds ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.46-0.73).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although most patients experienced a pDDI during their hospital stay, less than one-third of pDDIs were clinically relevant. The low prevalence of harm identified raises questions about the value of incorporating DDI decision support into systems given the potential negative impacts of DDI alerts.</p>","PeriodicalId":11382,"journal":{"name":"Drug Safety","volume":" ","pages":"557-569"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11116265/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-024-01412-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) have potential to cause patient harm, including lowering therapeutic efficacy. This study aimed to (i) determine the prevalence of potential DDIs (pDDIs); clinically relevant DDIs (cDDIs), that is, DDIs that could lead to patient harm, taking into account a patient's individual clinical profile, drug effects and severity of potential harmful outcome; and subsequent actual harm among hospitalized patients and (ii) examine the impact of transitioning from paper-based medication charts to electronic medication management (eMM) on DDIs and patient harms.

Methods: This was a secondary analysis of the control arm of a controlled pre-post study. Patients were randomly selected from three Australian hospitals. Retrospective chart review was conducted before and after the implementation of an eMM system, without accompanying clinical decision support alerts for DDIs. Harm was assessed by an expert panel.

Results: Of 1186 patient admissions, 70.1% (n = 831) experienced a pDDI, 42.6% (n = 505) a cDDI and 0.9% (n = 11) an actual harm in hospital. Of 15,860 pDDIs identified, 27.0% (n = 4285) were classified as cDDIs. The median number of pDDIs and cDDIs per 10 drugs were 6 [interquartile range (IQR) 2-13] and 0 (IQR 0-2), respectively. In cases where a cDDI was identified, both drugs were 44% less likely to be co-administered following eMM (adjusted odds ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.46-0.73).

Conclusion: Although most patients experienced a pDDI during their hospital stay, less than one-third of pDDIs were clinically relevant. The low prevalence of harm identified raises questions about the value of incorporating DDI decision support into systems given the potential negative impacts of DDI alerts.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
药物间相互作用与对住院患者的实际伤害:一项多中心研究,探讨电子用药系统实施前后的普遍性。
导言:药物相互作用(DDIs)有可能对患者造成伤害,包括降低疗效。本研究旨在(i)确定潜在DDIs(pDDIs)的发生率;临床相关DDIs(cDDIs),即可能导致患者伤害的DDIs,同时考虑到患者的个体临床概况、药物作用和潜在危害结果的严重程度;以及住院患者随后的实际伤害;(ii)研究从纸质用药表过渡到电子用药管理(eMM)对DDIs和患者伤害的影响:方法:这是对一项前后对照研究的对照组进行的二次分析。患者从澳大利亚三家医院随机抽取。在实施 eMM 系统前后进行了回顾性病历审查,该系统不附带 DDIs 临床决策支持警报。专家小组对危害性进行了评估:结果:在入院的 1186 名患者中,70.1%(n = 831)的患者在住院期间发生了 pDDI,42.6%(n = 505)的患者在住院期间发生了 cDDI,0.9%(n = 11)的患者在住院期间受到了实际伤害。在已确认的 15,860 例 pDDI 中,27.0%(n = 4285)被归类为 cDDI。每 10 种药物中 pDDI 和 cDDI 的中位数分别为 6 [四分位距 (IQR) 2-13] 和 0 (IQR 0-2)。在发现 cDDI 的病例中,eMM 后同时使用两种药物的可能性降低了 44%(调整后的几率比 0.56,95% 置信区间 0.46-0.73):结论:尽管大多数患者在住院期间都发生了pDDI,但只有不到三分之一的pDDI与临床相关。鉴于 DDI 警报的潜在负面影响,已发现的低危害发生率使人们对将 DDI 决策支持纳入系统的价值产生了疑问。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Drug Safety
Drug Safety 医学-毒理学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
7.10%
发文量
112
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Drug Safety is the official journal of the International Society of Pharmacovigilance. The journal includes: Overviews of contentious or emerging issues. Comprehensive narrative reviews that provide an authoritative source of information on epidemiology, clinical features, prevention and management of adverse effects of individual drugs and drug classes. In-depth benefit-risk assessment of adverse effect and efficacy data for a drug in a defined therapeutic area. Systematic reviews (with or without meta-analyses) that collate empirical evidence to answer a specific research question, using explicit, systematic methods as outlined by the PRISMA statement. Original research articles reporting the results of well-designed studies in disciplines such as pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacovigilance, pharmacology and toxicology, and pharmacogenomics. Editorials and commentaries on topical issues. Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in Drug Safety Drugs may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.
期刊最新文献
RETRACTED ARTICLE: Long-Term Safety Analysis of the BBV152 Coronavirus Vaccine in Adolescents and Adults: Findings from a 1-Year Prospective Study in North India. A Calculated Risk: Evaluation of QTc Drug-Drug Interaction (DDI) Clinical Decision Support (CDS) Alerts and Performance of the Tisdale Risk Score Calculator. Description and Validation of a Novel AI Tool, LabelComp, for the Identification of Adverse Event Changes in FDA Labeling. Examining the Effect of Missing Data and Unmeasured Confounding on External Comparator Studies: Case Studies and Simulations. Unveiling the Burden of Drug-Induced Impulsivity: A Network Analysis of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1