Compliance with National Guidelines for the Management of Drug–Drug Interactions in Dutch Community Pharmacies (original) (raw)
Related papers
Clinical Risk Management in Dutch Community Pharmacies
Drug Safety, 2006
Background: The prevention of drug-drug interactions requires a systematic Abstract approach for which the concept of clinical risk management can be used. The objective of our study was to measure the frequency, nature and management of drug-drug interaction alerts as these occur in daily practice of Dutch community pharmacies. Methods: In total, 63 Dutch pharmacies collected all drug-drug interaction alerts during 153 research days (on average 2.4 days/pharmacy), as well as variables related to these alerts, such as involved medicines, first time or recurrent drug-drug interaction, same or different prescribers, patient data (age, sex) and information about the management of drug-drug interactions by the pharmacy. The latter was discriminated into internal procedures only and external action, such as communication with the patient, the prescriber or the anticoagulation clinic and prescription modification. All drug-drug interactions were classified into categories of clinical relevance (A-F) and available evidence (0-4). Results: A total of 43 129 prescription-only medicines were dispensed during the study period. On average, 16.8 interaction alerts per day per pharmacy were collected. Approximately 6% of all prescriptions generated a drug-drug interaction alert. Of all alerts (n = 2572), 31.1% occurred for the first time and with 21% two different prescribers were involved. The 20 most frequently occurring drug-drug interaction alerts accounted for approximately 76% of all alerts. Cardiovascular drugs, NSAIDs, oral contraceptives and antibacterials were most frequently involved. External action was taken in response to 27.3% of the alerts, meaning either a modification of one of the concerned prescriptions (n = 65; 9.3%), communication with the prescriber or anticoagulation clinic (n = 90; 12.8%) or communication with the patient or a relative (n = 547; 77.9%). Where there was no external action (n = 1860; 72.3%), pharmacists concluded in about two-thirds of cases that the drug-drug interaction had been managed in the past. Other reasons not to intervene externally were for instance: incorrect alert; acceptable drug-drug interaction; or outcome of the interaction considered irrelevant. Adjusted for several variables, a first alert was found to be a main determinant for external action. After stratifying for first alerts no other significant determinants were found.
Clarity and Applicability of Drug-Drug Interaction Management Guidelines
Drug Safety, 2011
Background: Despite the availability and daily use of computerized drug-drug interaction surveillance systems, exposure to potentially relevant drug-drug interactions (DDIs) continues. DDI management guidelines are often inadequate and clear management options are lacking, which attributes to overriding of DDI signals. Although general criteria for the development and reporting of high-quality clinical practice guidelines have been identified, it appears these have not yet been applied to DDI management guidelines. Objectives: The aim of the study was to assess the clarity and applicability of guidelines for the management of potentially harmful DDIs. Methods: We selected 13 DDIs that are potentially harmful for patients and frequently occur in community pharmacy practice in the Netherlands. The clarity and applicability of the management guidelines of these DDIs were appraised using the appropriate two domains-'Clarity and presentation' and 'Applicability', of the validated Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) Instrument. The appraisal was performed by 12 community pharmacists and 12 general practitioners. The standardized domain scores and mean item scores for 'Clarity and presentation' and 'Applicability' were compared. Results: All DDI management guidelines were generally found to score well on 'Clarity and presentation', but poorly with respect to 'Applicability' (standardized domain scores 68.0 vs 26.1%). Within the domain 'Clarity and presentation', the item 'tools for application' received the lowest scores. Within the domain 'Applicability', cost implications, organizational barriers and key review criteria were all poorly documented. All guidelines presented nondirective advice using words such as 'consider' and 'regularly'.
Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice, 2022
Background: Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) can cause treatment failure and serious adverse drug reactions, leading to morbidity and mortality. Due to their significant effects on the patient's health, community pharmacists (CPs) competence in detecting and preventing these interactions is essential to provide optimal health services. Thus, this study aimed to explore the performance of the CPs in situations involving the presence of potential DDIs. Methods: A cross-sectional, simulated patient study was conducted in 235 community pharmacies in the Khartoum locality. Two scenarios were used to evaluate the performance of the CPs. Ten final year B. Pharm. students were selected to act as simulated patients (SPs); they were trained for two weeks to familiarize their roles. All encounters were documented immediately after leaving the pharmacy by the SPs in the data collection form. Results: All planned SPs visits were completed, resulting in 470 visits. None of the CPs asked about the patients' medication history in both scenarios. After the SPs provided information about the drug used currently by the patient, 13.6% and 23.4% of the CPs had identified the potential DDIs in scenario 1 and scenario 2, respectively. In scenario 1, 59.4% distinguished the interaction of simvastatin with both drugs, while, in scenario 2, 74.5% recognized the interaction of warfarin with both drugs. In identifying DDIs, around half of the CPs were dependent on their knowledge or using drug interaction checker programs. The most common intervention made by the CPs was referring the patient to the prescriber (56.3% CPs in scenario 1 and 60% CPs in scenario 2). Conclusion: CPs practice in identifying and managing potential DDIs was poor. The current CPs practices need substantial improvement. Therefore, professional education and the use of software programs in community pharmacies should be encouraged.
Possibility of Drug-Drug Interaction in Prescription Dispensed by Community and Hospital Pharmacy
Objective: To analyze the use of all subsidized prescription drugs including their use of drug combination generally accepted as carrying a risk of severe interactions. Methodology: In a cross sectional study, we analyzed all prescriptions (n = 1014) involving two or more drugs dispensed to the population (age range 4-85 years) from all pharmacies, clinics and hospitals. Data were stratified by age and sex, and frequency of common interacting drugs. Potential drug interactions were classified according to clinical relevance as significance of severity (types A: major, B: moderate , and C: minor) and documented evidence (types 1, 2, 3, and 4). Result and Discussion: The growing use of pharmacological agents means that drug interactions are of increasing interest for public health. Monitoring of potential drug interactions may improve the quality of drug prescribing and dispensing, and it might form a basis for education focused on appropriate prescribing. To make the manifestation of adverse interaction subside, management strategies must be exercised if two interacting drugs have to be taken with each other, involving: adjusting the dose of the object drug; spacing dosing times to avoid the interaction. The pharmacist, along with the prescriber has a duty to ensure that patients are aware of the risk of side effects and a suitable course of action they should take. Conclusion: It is unrealistic to expect clinicians to memorize the thousands of drug-drug interactions and their clinical significance, especially considering the rate of introduction of novel drugs and the escalating appreciation of the importance of pharmacoge-nomics. Reliable regularly updated decision support systems and information technology are necessary to help avert dangerous drug combinations.
Journal of the American Pharmacists Association, 2018
Objectives: In 2006, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a draft guidance for pharmacies to provide consumer medication information (CMI) to patients receiving prescription medications. The objective of this study was to evaluate CMI leaflets provided by community pharmacies for accuracy and completeness regarding drugedrug interactions (DDIs). Methods: CMI leaflets were obtained for 3 commonly prescribed medications (azithromycin, ciprofloxacin, and simvastatin) from 14 community pharmacies that are part of 6 chain organizations that operate in southern Arizona. Three to 4 salient interacting medications for each leaflet medication were identified with the use of 2 well recognized drug compendia. The content of the DDI information in the leaflets was evaluated for completeness. The font size and reading level of each leaflet were assessed as well. Results: The CMI provided by 14 pharmacies appeared to be produced by 2 information vendors, Wolters Kluwer and First Databank. This was evident based on the identical wording and attribution (e.g., copyright statements) on the leaflets. The CMI from First Databank mentioned 5 of the 11 previously identified interactions with the target medications, although 1 chain in this group chose not to print the DDI section at all and as a result scored 0. The CMI developed by Wolters Kluwer mentioned only 2 of the 11 identified DDIs. The average reading grade level for First Databank leaflets was 10.6 (SD 2.87), and the reading level for the CMI from Wolters Kluwer was 5.0 (SD 1.02). The font sizes varied from 8 to 12 points; FDA recommends that the information be printed in 12-point size or larger. Conclusion: Community pharmacies appear to be distributing CMI leaflets with limited warnings about serious and well known DDIs. The results of this study suggest that consumers are not being informed through the CMI about important known DDIs.
Reasons provided by prescribers when overriding drug-drug interaction alerts
The American journal of managed care, 2007
To investigate prescribers' rationales for overriding drug-drug interaction (DDI) alerts and to determine whether these reasons were helpful to pharmacists as a part of prescription order verification. An observational retrospective database analysis was conducted using override reasons derived from a computerized system at 6 Veterans Affairs medical centers. Data on DDI alerts (for interactions designated as…
Comment: Community Identification of Natural Health Product Drug Interactions
Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 2007
BACKGROUND: Pharmacists contribute to the detection and prevention of drug therapy-related problems, including drug-drug interactions. Little is known about compliance with pharmacy practice guidelines for the management of drug-drug interaction alerts. OBJECTIVE: To measure the compliance of community pharmacists with Dutch guidelines for the management of drug-drug interactions and to determine patient-and prescriber-related determinants for noncompliance. METHODS: Sixteen clinically relevant drug-drug interactions were included in the study based on certain described criteria. From June to August 2005, Dutch pharmacists (N = 149) collected alerts occurring in daily patient care for these interactions as well as information related to the patient, the alert itself, the prescriber, and the management of the alert. Noncompliance was measured by comparing the management executed by the pharmacy with the national guidelines. RESULTS: Overall compliance with the guidelines was 69.3% (n = 423), with large differences between the various drug-drug interactions. Male sex (OR 2.25; 95% CI 1.52 to 3.31), oldest age (>75 y; OR 1.97; 95% CI 1.03 to 3.75), and polypharmacy (>7 medications; OR 2.35; 95% CI 1.46 to 3.80) were associated with a higher probability for noncompliance with the guidelines. Prescriber-related variables had no significant influence on guideline compliance. Substitution of one of the involved agents, recommended for most of the drug-drug interactions, was executed in a small minority of cases. The outcome of interaction management, such as substitution, dose reduction, or temporary stop of one of the agents, was frequently inconsistent with the guidelines. Compliance rates were partly influenced by the ultimate decision made by the prescriber. In that way, pharmacies' compliance was not solely assessed. However, in only 22.5% of the cases was the drug-drug interaction presented to the prescriber. CONCLUSIONS: Noncompliance with Dutch guidelines for the management of drug-drug interaction alerts is common in community pharmacies. Further research into underlying reasons for noncompliance is warranted, such as the relation between pharmacist and prescriber in this context. PMID: 17971404 [PubMed -as supplied by publisher] Aggiornamento ADR Seconda quindicina di Ottobre '07 3: Ceska Slov Farm. 2007 Jul;56(4):165-73. Related Articles
European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, 2017
Objectives (1) To evaluate drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in general practitioners' (GPs) prescriptions; (2) to implement a cooperation project between pharmacists and GPs to improve DDI management and patient care. Methods In 2013, pharmacists from the Community Drug Assistance ASL TO1 launched a cooperation project involving 48 GPs. As a first step, GPs were asked to select, from a list, drug associations for which they recommended analysis of occurrence in their prescriptions. The pharmacists (1) analysed GPs' prescriptions dated 2012-2014, according to the list of DDIs selected (n= 9); (2) evaluated solutions for DDI management, using the Micromedex DDI checker database and literature analysis; they then (3) disseminated DDI-related information to GPs through training meetings and (4) assessed the efficacy of these actions through a questionnaire submitted to the GPs in 2013. results (1) Prescriptions analysis: a reduction in the number of DDIs was observed (−14% in 2013 vs 2012,-9% in 2014 vs 2012); in some cases these reductions were statistically significant (calcium carbonate + proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) −50%, p<0.0041, amoxicillin+lansoprazole −42%, p<0.0088). (2) Questionnaire: this was completed by 75% of GPs. The literature analysis was considered interesting by 94% of GPs; solutions were adopted by 89% of GPs and 34% of GPs affirmed that clinical improvements after application of the measures were observed in their patients, even if they could not provide quantitative data for this outcome. Conclusion The cooperation project between pharmacists and GPs was effective because it established a professional exchange between the two health professionals. The pharmacist gave support to GPs, which benefited the patients, who gained clinical improvements and improved satisfaction with their medical care, as declared by the GPs in answers to the questionnaire.
Detection of potential drug interactions – a model for a national pharmacy register
European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2006
Objective: The widespread use of pharmaceuticals prescribed by different physicians has caused the Swedish government to propose a new legislation with registration of all prescriptions dispensed at the Swedish pharmacies. In the present study, we wanted to examine the frequency, distribution and determinants of potential drug interactions. Methods: The prescriptions from all individuals (n=8,214) with two or more prescriptions during October 2003 to December 2004 were collected from the ongoing Jämtland cohort study of a total of about 11,000 individuals. Potential drug-drug interactions were detected with a computerized interaction detection system and classified according to clinical relevance (types A-D). Results: On average each individual filled 14.6 (men 14.3, women 14.8) prescriptions during the study period. 3.6% of the individuals used more than 15 different drugs. The number of detected potential drug interactions type A-D was 4,941 (men 1,949, women 2,992). The risk of receiving a potential interaction type A-D was estimated as the cumulative incidence 0.26 (2,116/8,214) overall, 0.22 (748/3,467) for men and 0.29 (1,368/4,747) for women during the 15-month study period. The age adjusted risk, RR adj , for women was estimated as 1.30. Excluding sex hormones and modulators of the genital system, the RR adj was 0.96, with no elevated risk for women. For potential interactions type D, that might have serious clinical consequences, 167 (cumulative incidence 0.0203) individuals (72 men, cumulative incidence 0.0208, 95 women cumulative incidence 0.0200) were detected. The risk of receiving a combination of potentially interacting drugs was positively correlated to age and polypharmacy. The cumulative incidence for elderly was estimated as 0.36 (65-84 years) and 0.39 (85 years and above). The relative risk for individuals with 15 drugs or more was estimated as 3.67 (95% CI 3.46-3.90). Conclusion: In a general population there were relatively few severe potential drug interactions. The new Swedish national pharmacy register will provide health care professionals with a powerful tool to systematically review all prescriptions. An alert system should focus on the more potential drug interactions, type C-D, with close monitoring of elderly and patients with polypharmacy.
Farmacia
The pharmacist can participate substantially in promoting effective and safe use of medicines, as he/she is often the last healthcare professional in contact with the patient, before the use of the drugs. Also, often pharmacists are the first to whom patients ask for advice due to their availability. This study aimed to evaluate the counselling provided by the pharmacist in the community pharmacy. We conducted a survey in pharmacies from 10 Romanian counties across the country. For the first 10/20 visitors of the pharmacy a questionnaire regarding the counselling provided by the pharmacist during the visit was filled in anonymously by the pharmacist. More than 80% of patients received advice from the pharmacist on the medicines' route of administration, use in relation to meals, dosage and duration of treatment. Around 60% of the patients were counselled on the medicines' contraindications and precautions, drug-drug interactions, additional changes in lifestyle and diet appr...