M Hahn1, S C Roll2. 1. Vitos Klinik Eichberg, Kloster-Eberbach-Str.4, 65346, Eltville, Deutschland. martina.hahn@vitos-rheingau.de. 2. Vitos Klinik Eichberg, Kloster-Eberbach-Str.4, 65346, Eltville, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Drug-drug interaction databases are an important tool to increase drug safety in polypharmacy. There are several drug interaction databases available but it is unclear which one shows the best results and therefore increases safety for the user of the databases and the patients. So far, there has been no validation of German drug interaction databases. GOAL: Validation of German drug interaction databases regarding the number of hits, mechanisms of drug interaction, references, clinical advice, and severity of the interaction. METHODS: A total of 36 drug interactions which were published in the last 3-5 years were checked in 5 different databases. Besides the number of hits, it was also documented if the mechanism was correct, clinical advice was given, primary literature was cited, and the severity level of the drug-drug interaction was given. RESULTS: All databases showed weaknesses regarding the hit rate of the tested drug interactions, with a maximum of 67.7% hits. The highest score in this validation was achieved by MediQ with 104 out of 180 points. PsiacOnline achieved 83 points, arznei-telegramm® 58, ifap index® 54 and the ABDA-database 49 points. Based on this validation MediQ seems to be the most suitable databank for the field of psychopharmacotherapy. DISCUSSION: The best results in this comparison were achieved by MediQ but this database also needs improvement with respect to the hit rate so that the users can rely on the results and therefore increase drug therapy safety.
BACKGROUND: Drug-drug interaction databases are an important tool to increase drug safety in polypharmacy. There are several drug interaction databases available but it is unclear which one shows the best results and therefore increases safety for the user of the databases and the patients. So far, there has been no validation of German drug interaction databases. GOAL: Validation of German drug interaction databases regarding the number of hits, mechanisms of drug interaction, references, clinical advice, and severity of the interaction. METHODS: A total of 36 drug interactions which were published in the last 3-5 years were checked in 5 different databases. Besides the number of hits, it was also documented if the mechanism was correct, clinical advice was given, primary literature was cited, and the severity level of the drug-drug interaction was given. RESULTS: All databases showed weaknesses regarding the hit rate of the tested drug interactions, with a maximum of 67.7% hits. The highest score in this validation was achieved by MediQ with 104 out of 180 points. PsiacOnline achieved 83 points, arznei-telegramm® 58, ifap index® 54 and the ABDA-database 49 points. Based on this validation MediQ seems to be the most suitable databank for the field of psychopharmacotherapy. DISCUSSION: The best results in this comparison were achieved by MediQ but this database also needs improvement with respect to the hit rate so that the users can rely on the results and therefore increase drug therapy safety.
Entities:
Keywords:
Database; Drug therapy safety; Drug-drug interaction; Psychopharmacotherapy; Validation
Authors: Daniel C Malone; Jacob Abarca; Grant H Skrepnek; John E Murphy; Edward P Armstrong; Amy J Grizzle; Rick A Rehfeld; Raymond L Woosley Journal: Med Care Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Patrice Forget; Bernard le Polain de Waroux; Pierre Wallemacq; Jean-Luc Gala Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2008-03-21 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Michael Hecker; Niklas Frahm; Paula Bachmann; Jane Louisa Debus; Marie-Celine Haker; Pegah Mashhadiakbar; Silvan Elias Langhorst; Julia Baldt; Barbara Streckenbach; Felicita Heidler; Uwe Klaus Zettl Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2022-08-05 Impact factor: 5.988
Authors: Paula Bachmann; Niklas Frahm; Jane Louisa Debus; Pegah Mashhadiakbar; Silvan Elias Langhorst; Barbara Streckenbach; Julia Baldt; Felicita Heidler; Michael Hecker; Uwe Klaus Zettl Journal: Pharmaceutics Date: 2022-03-08 Impact factor: 6.321