Literature DB >> 20040698

Black box warning contraindicated comedications: concordance among three major drug interaction screening programs.

Lorraine M Wang1, Maple Wong, James M Lightwood, Christine M Cheng.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Black box warnings represent the strongest safety warning that the Food and Drug Administration can issue for a marketed prescription drug. Some black box warnings recommend against coadministration of specific medications due to an increased risk for serious, perhaps life-threatening, effects.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the level of agreement in presence, clinical severity scores level of documentation ratings, and alert content among 3 leading drug interaction screening programs with regard to contraindicated comedications that are mentioned in black box warnings.
METHODS: We reviewed the prescribing information for currently marketed prescription drugs with a black box warning that mentioned a contraindicated drug combination. We selected the drug interaction databases Facts & Comparisons 4.0, MICROMEDEX DRUG-REAX, and Lexi-Comp Lexi-Interact to evaluate the interactions. Discrepancies in the inclusion of interactions and level of agreement in clinical severity scores and level of documentation ratings for each interaction were assessed, using descriptive statistics, Spearman's correlation coefficient, Kendall-Stuart tau-c, and Cronbach's alpha.
RESULTS: We identified 11 drugs with black box warnings that contained information on 59 unique contraindicated drug combinations, only 68% of which were covered by any source. Lexi-Comp detected the most interactions (n = 29) and DRUG-REAX the least (n = 18). Only 3 drug combinations were detected and rated as contraindicated or potentially life-threatening in all 3 databases. The severity scores and level of documentation ratings varied widely.
CONCLUSIONS: There are discrepancies among major drug interaction screening programs in the inclusion, severity, and level of documentation of contraindicated drug combinations mentioned in black box warnings. Further studies could explore the implications of these inconsistencies, particularly with regard to the integration of black box warning information in clinical practice. Clinicians should consult multiple drug resources to maximize the potential for detecting a potentially severe drug interaction.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20040698     DOI: 10.1345/aph.1M475

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Pharmacother        ISSN: 1060-0280            Impact factor:   3.154


  30 in total

1.  High-priority drug-drug interactions for use in electronic health records.

Authors:  Shobha Phansalkar; Amrita A Desai; Douglas Bell; Eileen Yoshida; John Doole; Melissa Czochanski; Blackford Middleton; David W Bates
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2012-04-26       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Impact of the drug-drug interaction database SFINX on prevalence of potentially serious drug-drug interactions in primary health care.

Authors:  M L Andersson; Y Böttiger; J D Lindh; B Wettermark; B Eiermann
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2012-07-01       Impact factor: 2.953

3.  Drug interaction databases in medical literature: transparency of ownership, funding, classification algorithms, level of documentation, and staff qualifications. A systematic review.

Authors:  Gertrud Gansmo Kongsholm; Anna Katrine Toft Nielsen; Per Damkier
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 2.953

4.  Assessment of the consistency among three drug compendia in listing and ranking of drug-drug interactions.

Authors:  Božana S Nikolić; Maja S Ilić
Journal:  Bosn J Basic Med Sci       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 3.363

5.  Comparative analysis of three drug-drug interaction screening systems against probable clinically relevant drug-drug interactions: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Neža Muhič; Ales Mrhar; Miran Brvar
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2017-03-15       Impact factor: 2.953

6.  Toward a complete dataset of drug-drug interaction information from publicly available sources.

Authors:  Serkan Ayvaz; John Horn; Oktie Hassanzadeh; Qian Zhu; Johann Stan; Nicholas P Tatonetti; Santiago Vilar; Mathias Brochhausen; Matthias Samwald; Majid Rastegar-Mojarad; Michel Dumontier; Richard D Boyce
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2015-04-24       Impact factor: 6.317

7.  Use and perceived benefits of mobile devices by physicians in preventing adverse drug events in the nursing home.

Authors:  Steven M Handler; Richard D Boyce; Frank M Ligons; Subashan Perera; David A Nace; Harry Hochheiser
Journal:  J Am Med Dir Assoc       Date:  2013-10-02       Impact factor: 4.669

8.  Comparative performance of two drug interaction screening programmes analysing a cross-sectional prescription dataset of 84,625 psychiatric inpatients.

Authors:  Olesya I Zorina; Patrick Haueis; Waldemar Greil; Renate Grohmann; Gerd A Kullak-Ublick; Stefan Russmann
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 5.606

9.  Patient completion of laboratory tests to monitor medication therapy: a mixed-methods study.

Authors:  Shira H Fischer; Terry S Field; Shawn J Gagne; Kathleen M Mazor; Peggy Preusse; George Reed; Daniel Peterson; Jerry H Gurwitz; Jennifer Tjia
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2012-11-15       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Factors associated with ordering laboratory monitoring of high-risk medications.

Authors:  Shira H Fischer; Jennifer Tjia; George Reed; Daniel Peterson; Jerry H Gurwitz; Terry S Field
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2014-06-26       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.