OBJECTIVE: The research sought to evaluate seven drug information resources, specifically designed for analyzing drug interactions for scope, completeness, and ease of use, and determine the consistency of content among the seven resources. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted where 100 drug-drug and drug-dietary supplement interactions were analyzed using 7 drug information resources: Lexicomp Interactions module, Micromedex Drug Interactions, Clinical Pharmacology Drug Interaction Report, Facts & Comparisons eAnswers, Stockley's Drug Interactions (10th edition), Drug Interactions Analysis and Management (2014), and Drug Interaction Facts (2015). The interaction sample was developed based on published resources and peer input. Two independent reviewers gathered data for each interaction from each of the 7 resources using a common form. RESULTS: Eighty-two drug-drug and 18 drug-dietary supplement interactions were analyzed. Scope scores were higher for Lexicomp Interactions (97.0%), Clinical Pharmacology Drug Interaction Report (97.0%), and Micromedex Drug Interactions (93.0%) compared to all other resources (p<0.05 for each comparison). Overall completeness scores were higher for Micromedex Drug Interactions (median 5, interquartile range [IQR] 4 to 5) compared to all other resources (p<0.01 for each comparison) and were higher for Lexicomp Interactions (median 4, IQR 4 to 5), Facts & Comparisons eAnswers (median 4, IQR 4 to 5), and Drug Interaction Facts (4, IQR 4 to 5) compared to all other resources, except Micromedex (p<0.05 for each comparison). Ease of use, in terms of time to locate information and time to gather information, was similar among resources. Consistency score was higher for Micromedex (69.9%) compared to all other resources (p<0.05 for each comparison). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical Pharmacology Drug Interaction Report, Lexicomp Interactions, and Micromedex Drug Interactions scored highest in scope. Micromedex Drug Interactions and Lexicomp Interactions scored highest in completeness. Consistency scores were overall low, but Micromedex Drug Interactions was the highest.
OBJECTIVE: The research sought to evaluate seven drug information resources, specifically designed for analyzing drug interactions for scope, completeness, and ease of use, and determine the consistency of content among the seven resources. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted where 100 drug-drug and drug-dietary supplement interactions were analyzed using 7 drug information resources: Lexicomp Interactions module, Micromedex Drug Interactions, Clinical Pharmacology Drug Interaction Report, Facts & Comparisons eAnswers, Stockley's Drug Interactions (10th edition), Drug Interactions Analysis and Management (2014), and Drug Interaction Facts (2015). The interaction sample was developed based on published resources and peer input. Two independent reviewers gathered data for each interaction from each of the 7 resources using a common form. RESULTS: Eighty-two drug-drug and 18 drug-dietary supplement interactions were analyzed. Scope scores were higher for Lexicomp Interactions (97.0%), Clinical Pharmacology Drug Interaction Report (97.0%), and Micromedex Drug Interactions (93.0%) compared to all other resources (p<0.05 for each comparison). Overall completeness scores were higher for Micromedex Drug Interactions (median 5, interquartile range [IQR] 4 to 5) compared to all other resources (p<0.01 for each comparison) and were higher for Lexicomp Interactions (median 4, IQR 4 to 5), Facts & Comparisons eAnswers (median 4, IQR 4 to 5), and Drug Interaction Facts (4, IQR 4 to 5) compared to all other resources, except Micromedex (p<0.05 for each comparison). Ease of use, in terms of time to locate information and time to gather information, was similar among resources. Consistency score was higher for Micromedex (69.9%) compared to all other resources (p<0.05 for each comparison). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical Pharmacology Drug Interaction Report, Lexicomp Interactions, and Micromedex Drug Interactions scored highest in scope. Micromedex Drug Interactions and Lexicomp Interactions scored highest in completeness. Consistency scores were overall low, but Micromedex Drug Interactions was the highest.
Authors: Daniel C Malone; Jacob Abarca; Philip D Hansten; Amy J Grizzle; Edward P Armstrong; Robin C Van Bergen; Babette S Duncan-Edgar; Steven L Solomon; Richard B Lipton Journal: J Am Pharm Assoc (2003) Date: 2004 Mar-Apr
Authors: Kevin A Clauson; Wallace A Marsh; Hyla H Polen; Matthew J Seamon; Blanca I Ortiz Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2007-03-08 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Emily J Cicali; D Max Smith; Benjamin Q Duong; Lukas G Kovar; Larisa H Cavallari; Julie A Johnson Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2020-02-13 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Elena Morte-Romea; Pilar Luque-Gómez; Mercedes Arenere-Mendoza; Jose Luis Sierra-Monzón; Ana Camón Pueyo; Galadriel Pellejero Sagastizabal; Guillermo Verdejo Muñoz; David Sánchez Fabra; José Ramón Paño-Pardo Journal: Antibiotics (Basel) Date: 2020-01-04