INTRODUCTION: Computerised drug interaction surveillance systems (CIS) may be helpful in detecting clinically significant drug interactions. Experience with CIS reveals that they often yield alerts with questionable clinical significance, fail to provide relevant information on risk factors for the adverse reaction of the interaction and fail to detect all significant drug interactions. These problems highlight the importance of transparency and selectivity in choosing the drug interactions to be included in CIS. In The Netherlands, the Working Group on Pharmacotherapy and Drug Information is responsible for maintenance of the CIS of the Royal Dutch Association for the Advancement of Pharmacy (KNMP). METHODS: The Working Group developed an evidence-based procedure for structured assessment of drug-drug interactions and revised all drug interactions in the CIS accordingly. RESULTS: For every drug interaction four core parameters were assessed: (i) evidence on the interaction; (ii) clinical relevance of the potential adverse reaction resulting from the interaction; (iii) risk factors identifying patient, medication or disease characteristics for which the interaction is of special importance; and (iv) the incidence of the adverse reaction. On the basis of this assessment the drug-drug interactions for inclusion in the CIS were selected. After revision of the drug combinations in the KNMP-CIS, the Working Group judged 22% of the combinations to be not interacting and another 12% to be interacting but not requiring action. On the basis of this assessment the subset of drug combinations for which interaction alerts are generated and the information on management of a drug interaction alert for users of the CIS were adapted. When an alert is generated by the CIS, the user of the system is supplied with comprehensive information on the four core parameters, the mechanism of the interaction and critical information for management of the interaction for the individual patient. DISCUSSION: This structured procedure offers the possibility for transparent and reproducible assessment of the clinical relevance of drug interactions. CONCLUSION: A CIS selectively generating interaction alerts based on this assessment may help in realising the goal of good clinical practice and may offer a methodology to further increase drug safety.
INTRODUCTION: Computerised drug interaction surveillance systems (CIS) may be helpful in detecting clinically significant drug interactions. Experience with CIS reveals that they often yield alerts with questionable clinical significance, fail to provide relevant information on risk factors for the adverse reaction of the interaction and fail to detect all significant drug interactions. These problems highlight the importance of transparency and selectivity in choosing the drug interactions to be included in CIS. In The Netherlands, the Working Group on Pharmacotherapy and Drug Information is responsible for maintenance of the CIS of the Royal Dutch Association for the Advancement of Pharmacy (KNMP). METHODS: The Working Group developed an evidence-based procedure for structured assessment of drug-drug interactions and revised all drug interactions in the CIS accordingly. RESULTS: For every drug interaction four core parameters were assessed: (i) evidence on the interaction; (ii) clinical relevance of the potential adverse reaction resulting from the interaction; (iii) risk factors identifying patient, medication or disease characteristics for which the interaction is of special importance; and (iv) the incidence of the adverse reaction. On the basis of this assessment the drug-drug interactions for inclusion in the CIS were selected. After revision of the drug combinations in the KNMP-CIS, the Working Group judged 22% of the combinations to be not interacting and another 12% to be interacting but not requiring action. On the basis of this assessment the subset of drug combinations for which interaction alerts are generated and the information on management of a drug interaction alert for users of the CIS were adapted. When an alert is generated by the CIS, the user of the system is supplied with comprehensive information on the four core parameters, the mechanism of the interaction and critical information for management of the interaction for the individual patient. DISCUSSION: This structured procedure offers the possibility for transparent and reproducible assessment of the clinical relevance of drug interactions. CONCLUSION: A CIS selectively generating interaction alerts based on this assessment may help in realising the goal of good clinical practice and may offer a methodology to further increase drug safety.
Authors: Elizabeth A Chrischilles; Thomas R Fulda; Patricia J Byrns; Susan C Winckler; Michael T Rupp; Michelle A Chui Journal: J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash) Date: 2002 May-Jun
Authors: David N Juurlink; Muhammad Mamdani; Alexander Kopp; Andreas Laupacis; Donald A Redelmeier Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-04-02 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: J Doucet; P Chassagne; C Trivalle; I Landrin; M D Pauty; N Kadri; J F Ménard; E Bercoff Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 1996-08 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Rianne J Zaal; Mark M P M Jansen; Marjolijn Duisenberg-van Essenberg; Cees C Tijssen; Jan A Roukema; Patricia M L A van den Bemt Journal: Int J Clin Pharm Date: 2013-05-29
Authors: Annemieke Floor-Schreudering; Arjen F J Geerts; Jeffrey K Aronson; Marcel L Bouvy; Robin E Ferner; Peter A G M De Smet Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2013-12-05 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Shobha Phansalkar; Heleen van der Sijs; Alisha D Tucker; Amrita A Desai; Douglas S Bell; Jonathan M Teich; Blackford Middleton; David W Bates Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2012-09-25 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: F van Stiphout; J E F Zwart-van Rijkom; J Versmissen; H Koffijberg; J E C M Aarts; I H van der Sijs; T van Gelder; R A de Man; C B Roes; A C G Egberts; E W M T Ter Braak Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2018-03-23 Impact factor: 4.335