[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Evaluation of Potential Drug–Drug Interactions in Adults in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

  • Systematic Review
  • Published:
Drug Safety Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Letter to the Editor to this article was published on 29 January 2020

Abstract

Introduction

There is an increased risk of potential drug–drug interactions (pDDIs) in critically ill patients based on the number of drugs received. The occurrence of pDDIs and clinical significance is not well described.

Objective

The aim was to provide insight into important clinical issues and offer guidance on drug–drug interaction (DDI) surveillance through the performance of a systematic review.

Methods

Five targeted objectives were developed, a priori, which guided study selection and data abstraction. Two independent reviewers extracted the definition, frequency, type, and clinical significance of pDDIs. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the proportion of patients exposed to a pDDI. Three data sources (PubMed, Embase, and Scopus) were utilized for the search to include studies that evaluated pDDIs in adult critically ill patients. Included studies in the systematic review and meta-analysis were required to be full text.

Results

A total of 39 studies met inclusion criteria. Definitions of pDDIs were diverse. Frequency of pDDIs varied by study, but was most commonly between one and five pDDIs per patient. Fifty-eight percent of patients were exposed to at least one pDDI during their intensive care unit admission. Types of pDDIs identified were numerous, with aspirin being the most common drug involved. As expected, not all pDDIs were clinically significant. Clinical significance was determined by varied definitions and sources.

Conclusions

Improving the understanding of clinically significant pDDIs and alerts that clinicians encounter may guide better development of surveillance through clinical decision support and decrease alert fatigue.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Uijtendaal EV, van Harssel LL, Hugenholtz GW, Kuck EM, Zwart-van Rijkom JE, Cremer OL, et al. Analysis of potential drug–drug interactions in medical intensive care unit patients. Pharmacotherapy. 2014;34(3):213–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kannan B, Nagella AB, Sathia Prabhu A, Sasidharan GM, Ramesh AS, Madhugiri V, et al. Incidence of potential drug–drug interactions in a limited and stereotyped prescription setting—comparison of two free online pharmacopoeias. Cureus. 2016;8(11):e886.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Wong A, Wright A, Seger DL, Amato MG, Fiskio JM, Bates D. Comparison of overridden medication-related clinical decision support in the intensive care unit between a commercial system and a legacy system. Appl Clin Inform. 2017;8(3):866–79.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Nanji KC, Seger DL, Slight SP, Amato MG, Beeler PE, Her QL, et al. Medication-related clinical decision support alert overrides in inpatients. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018;25(5):476–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kane-Gill SL, O’Connor MF, Rothschild JM, Selby NM, McLean B, Bonafide CP, et al. Technologic distractions (part 1): summary of approaches to manage alert quantity with intent to reduce alert fatigue and suggestions for alert fatigue metrics. Crit Care Med. 2017;45(9):1481–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kane-Gill SL, Kirisci L, Verrico MM, Rothschild JM. Analysis of risk factors for adverse drug events in critically ill patients. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(3):823–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Evans RS, Lloyd JF, Stoddard GJ, Nebeker JR, Samore MH. Risk factors for adverse drug events: a 10-year analysis. Ann Pharmacother. 2005;39(7–8):1161–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg. 2010;8(5):336–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Monaghan MS, Falls L, Olsen KM. Potential drug interactions with H2-receptor antagonists in intensive care unit patients. Hosp Pharm. 1993;28(4):296–7 (300-1, 5 passim).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. World Health Organization (2005) World alliance for patient safety: WHO draft guidelines for adverse event reporting and learning systems: from information to action. Geneva: World Health Organization. 2005. http://www.who.int/iris/handle/10665/69797. Accessed 30 Jul 2018.

  11. Nyaga VN, Arbyn M, Aerts M. Metaprop: a Stata command to perform meta-analysis of binomial data. Arch Public Health. 2014;72(1):39.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Hasan SS, Lim KN, Anwar M, Sathvik BS, Ahmadi K, Yuan AW, et al. Impact of pharmacists’ intervention on identification and management of drug–drug interactions in an intensive care setting. Singap Med J. 2012;53(8):526–31.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Smithburger PL, Kane-Gill SL, Seybert AL. Drug–drug interactions in cardiac and cardiothoracic intensive care units: an analysis of patients in an academic medical centre in the US. Drug Saf. 2010;33(10):879–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Armahizer MJ, Kane-Gill SL, Smithburger PL, Anthes AM, Seybert AL. Comparing drug–drug interaction severity ratings between bedside clinicians and proprietary databases. ISRN Crit Care. 2013;2013:347346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jain S, Jain P, Sharma K, Saraswat P. A prospective analysis of drug interactions in patients of intensive cardiac care unit. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017;11(3):Fc01–fc04.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Depont F, Vargas F, Dutronc H, Giauque E, Ragnaud JM, Galperine T, et al. Drug–drug interactions with systemic antifungals in clinical practice. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2007;16(11):1227–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Polidori P, Di Giorgio C, Provenzani A. Incidence of potential drug interactions in a transplant centre setting and relevance of electronic alerts for clinical practice support. Inform Prim Care. 2012;20(4):257–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ramos GV, Guaraldo L, Japiassu AM, Bozza FA. Comparison of two databases to detect potential drug–drug interactions between prescriptions of HIV/AIDS patients in critical care. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2015;40(1):63–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Armahizer MJ, Seybert AL, Smithburger PL, Kane-Gill SL. Drug–drug interactions contributing to QT prolongation in cardiac intensive care units. J Crit Care. 2013;28(3):243–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rafiei H, Abdar ME, Amiri M, Ahmadinejad M. The study of harmful and beneficial drug interactions in intensive care, Kerman, Iran. J Intensive Care Med. 2013;14(2):155–8.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Baniasadi S, Farzanegan B, Alehashem M. Important drug classes associated with potential drug–drug interactions in critically ill patients: highlights for cardiothoracic intensivists. Ann Intensive Care. 2015;5(1):44.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Rivkin A, Yin H. Evaluation of the role of the critical care pharmacist in identifying and avoiding or minimizing significant drug–drug interactions in medical intensive care patients. J Crit Care. 2011;26(1):104.e1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Jankovic SM, Pejcic AV, Milosavljevic MN, Opancina VD, Pesic NV, Nedeljkovic TT, et al. Risk factors for potential drug–drug interactions in intensive care unit patients. J Crit Care. 2018;43:1–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bertsche T, Pfaff J, Schiller P, Kaltschmidt J, Pruszydlo MG, Stremmel W, et al. Prevention of adverse drug reactions in intensive care patients by personal intervention based on an electronic clinical decision support system. Intensive Care Med. 2010;36(4):665–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Reis AM, Cassiani SH. Adverse drug events in an intensive care unit of a university hospital. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2011;67(6):625–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ahn EK, Kam HJ, Park DK, Jung EY, Lee Y, Park RW. Differences among admitting departments in alerts and alert overrides for drug–drug interaction. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2014;23(4):390–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Rodrigues AT, Stahlschmidt R, Granja S, Pilger D, Falcão ALE, Mazzola PG. Prevalence of potential drug–drug interactions in the intensive care unit of a Brazilian teaching hospital. Braz J Pharm Sci. 2017;53(1).

  28. Askari M, Eslami S, Louws M, Dongelmans D, Wierenga P, Kuiper R, et al. Relevance of drug–drug interaction in the ICU—perceptions of intensivists and pharmacists. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012;180:716–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Reis AM, Cassiani SH. Prevalence of potential drug interactions in patients in an intensive care unit of a university hospital in Brazil. Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil). 2011;66(1):9–15.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7(3):177–88.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315(7109):629–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Smithburger PL, Kane-Gill SL, Seybert AL. Drug–drug interactions in the medical intensive care unit: an assessment of frequency, severity and the medications involved. Int J Pharm Pract. 2012;20(6):402–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ray S, Pramanik J, Bhattacharyya M, Todi S. Prospective observational evaluation of incidences and implications of drug–drug interactions induced adverse drug reactions in critically ill patients. Indian J Pharm Sci. 2010;72(6):787–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Vanham D, Spinewine A, Hantson P, Wittebole X, Wouters D, Sneyers B. Drug–drug interactions in the intensive care unit: do they really matter? J Crit Care. 2017;38:97–103.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Rodrigues AT, Stahlschmidt R, Granja S, Falcao AL, Moriel P, Mazzola PG. Clinical relevancy and risks of potential drug–drug interactions in intensive therapy. Saudi Pharm J. 2015;23(4):366–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Abideen S. Assessment of prevalence of potential drug–drug interactions in medical intensive care unit of a tertiary care hospital in India. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2015;8(1):125–30.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Gulcebi Idriz Oglu M, Kucukibrahimoglu E, Karaalp A, Sarikaya O, Demirkapu M, Onat F, et al. Potential drug–drug interactions in a medical intensive care unit of a university hospital. Turk J Med Sci. 2016;46(3):812–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Askari M, Eslami S, Louws M, Wierenga PC, Dongelmans DA, Kuiper RA, et al. Frequency and nature of drug–drug interactions in the intensive care unit. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2013;22(4):430–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Moura C, Prado N, Acurcio F. Potential drug–drug interactions associated with prolonged stays in the intensive care unit: a retrospective cohort study. Clin Drug Investig. 2011;31(5):309–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Mahmoud Abd El Samia Mohamed, Gad Z, El-Nimr N, Abdel Razek A. Prevalence and pattern of potential drug–drug interactions in the critical care units of a tertiary hospital in Alexandria, Egypt. Adv Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2013;2:144.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Hamidy MY, Fauzia D. Significant drug interactions among intensive care unit patients. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2017;10(14):35–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Bista D, Saha A, Mishra P, Palaian S, Shankar PR. Pattern of potential drug–drug interactions in the intensive care unit of a teaching hospital in Nepal: a pilot study. J Clin Diagn. 2009;3:1713–6.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Carvalho REFLD, Reis AMM, Faria LMPD, Zago KSDA, Cassiani SHDB. Prevalence of drug interactions in intensive care units in Brazil. Acta Paul Enferm. 2013;26(2):150–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Alvim MM, Silva LA, Leite IC, Silverio MS. Adverse events caused by potential drug–drug interactions in an intensive care unit of a teaching hospital. Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2015;27(4):353–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Amkreutz J, Koch A, Buendgens L, Muehlfeld A, Trautwein C, Eisert A. Prevalence and nature of potential drug–drug interactions among kidney transplant patients in a German intensive care unit. Int J Clin Pharm. 2017;39(5):1128–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Łój P, Olender A, Slezak W, Krzych LJ. Pharmacokinetic drug–drug interactions in the intensive care unit—single-centre experience and literature review. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2017;49(4):259–67.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Farzanegan B, Alehashem M, Bastani M, Baniasadi S. Potential drug–drug interactions in cardiothoracic intensive care unit of a pulmonary teaching hospital. J Clin Pharmacol. 2015;55(2):132–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Gupta M, Chincholkar AS, Wagh RJ, Maheshwari N, Siddiqui W. A study of potential drug–drug interactions among critically ill patients at a tertiary care hospital. Int J Basic Clin Pharmacol. 2016;5(4):1281–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Joshua L, Devi P, Guido S. Adverse drug reactions in medical intensive care unit of a tertiary care hospital. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2009;18(7):639–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Lima RE, De Bortoli Cassiani SH. Potential drug interactions in intensive care patients at a teaching hospital. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2009;17(2):222–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Ko Y, Malone DC, Skrepnek GH, Armstrong EP, Murphy JE, Abarca J, et al. Prescribers’ knowledge of and sources of information for potential drug–drug interactions: a postal survey of US prescribers. Drug Saf. 2008;31(6):525–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Shakeel F, Khan JA, Aamir M. Relationship of factors affecting clinically important drug interactions and their significance in surgical intensive care units in Pakistan. Lat Am J Pharm. 2018;37(4):643–50.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Zheng WY, Richardson LC, Li L, Day RO, Westbrook JI, Baysari MT. Drug–drug interactions and their harmful effects in hospitalised patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2018;74(1):15–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Wang LM, Wong M, Lightwood JM, Cheng CM. Black box warning contraindicated comedications: concordance among three major drug interaction screening programs. Ann Pharmacother. 2010;44(1):28–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Scheife RT, Hines LE, Boyce RD, Chung SP, Momper JD, Sommer CD, et al. Consensus recommendations for systematic evaluation of drug–drug interaction evidence for clinical decision support. Drug Saf. 2015;38(2):197–206.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Ayvaz S, Horn J, Hassanzadeh O, Zhu Q, Stan J, Tatonetti NP, et al. Toward a complete dataset of drug–drug interaction information from publicly available sources. J Biomed Inform. 2015;55:206–17.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Tilson H, Hines LE, McEvoy G, Weinstein DM, Hansten PD, Matuszewski K, et al. Recommendations for selecting drug–drug interactions for clinical decision support. Am J Health System Pharm. 2016;73(8):576–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Epocrates. AthenaHealth, Inc., Watetown, MA. http://online.epocrates.com. Accessed 10 Jun 2018.

  59. Micromedex Solutions. Truven Health Analytics, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI. http://www.micromedexsolutions.com. Accessed 10 Jun2018.

  60. Stockley’s drug interactions: a source book of interactions, their mechanisms, clinical importance and management. London; Chicago: Pharmaceutical Press, 2006. Print.

  61. Lexi-Drugs. LexiComp. Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc., Riverwoods, IL. http://online.lexi.com. Accessed 10 Jun 2018.

  62. McEvoy DS, Sittig DF, Hickman TT, Aaron S, Ai A, Amato M, et al. Variation in high-priority drug–drug interaction alerts across institutions and electronic health records. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017;24(2):331–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Cornu P, Phansalkar S, Seger DL, Cho I, Pontefract S, Robertson A, et al. High-priority and low-priority drug–drug interactions in different international electronic health record systems: a comparative study. Int J Med Inform. 2018;111:165–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. van Roon EN, Flikweert S, le Comte M, Langendijk PN, Kwee-Zuiderwijk WJ, Smits P, et al. Clinical relevance of drug–drug interactions: a structured assessment procedure. Drug Saf. 2005;28(12):1131–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Zeng X, Zhang Y, Kwong JS, Zhang C, Li S, Sun F, et al. The methodological quality assessment tools for preclinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta-analysis, and clinical practice guideline: a systematic review. J Evid Based Med. 2015;8(1):2–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, University of Pittsburgh, 303 Baum, 4B- 4, 5607, Baum Boulevard, Pittsburgh, PA, 15206, USA

    Mary Grace Fitzmaurice, Adrian Wong, Hannah Akerberg, Simona Avramovska & Pamela L. Smithburger

  2. Department of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, MCPHS University, 179 Longwood Avenue, Boston, MA, USA

    Adrian Wong

  3. Department of Pharmacy, UPMC Presbyterian, 200 Lothrop Street, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Pamela L. Smithburger & Sandra L. Kane-Gill

  4. Department of Pharmacy, Banner-University Medical Center Phoenix, 1111 E. McDowell Road, Phoenix, AZ, USA

    Mitchell S. Buckley

  5. Department of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, Critical Care Medicine, Biomedical Informatics and Clinical Translational Science Institute, University of Pittsburgh, 638 Salk Hall, 3501 Terrace Street, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA

    Sandra L. Kane-Gill

Authors
  1. Mary Grace Fitzmaurice
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adrian Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hannah Akerberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Simona Avramovska
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Pamela L. Smithburger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mitchell S. Buckley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Sandra L. Kane-Gill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sandra L. Kane-Gill.

Ethics declarations

Funding

No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this review.

Conflict of interest

Mary Grace Fitzmaurice, Adrian Wong, Hannah Akerberg, Simona Avramovska, Pamela L. Smithburger, Mitchell S. Buckley, and Sandra L. Kane-Gill declare they have no conflicts of interest relevant to the content of this review.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fitzmaurice, M.G., Wong, A., Akerberg, H. et al. Evaluation of Potential Drug–Drug Interactions in Adults in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Drug Saf 42, 1035–1044 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-019-00829-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-019-00829-y

Search

Navigation