Ulrike Georgi1,2, Julia Lämmel2,3, Thomas Datzmann2,4, Jochen Schmitt2, Stefanie Deckert2. 1. Pharmacy Service of Clinical Center, Chemnitz, Germany. 2. Center for Evidence-based Healthcare, University Hospital and Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany. 3. Pharmacy Service, Medical Center of the Carl Gustav Carus Technical University, Dresden, Germany. 4. National Center for Tumor Diseases, Dresden, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The need for drug-related safety warnings is undisputed, and their impact should also be evaluated. This systematic review investigates and assesses the impact of safety warnings on drug therapy. METHODS: Studies published in English between January 1998 and December 2018 were searched in EMBASE and MEDLINE, complemented by manual search. Randomised controlled trials, cohort studies with a before/after component, and case-control studies were included, selected to predefined criteria, and assessed for their reporting and methodological quality. RESULTS: Out of 7454 references identified, 72 studies were included. A total of 28/72 (39%) studies described the impact of safety warnings on drug therapy as being effective, whereas 12/72 (17%) studies did not. Further, 26/72 (36%) studies described a partial implementation of the warnings (one part of the warning had an impact on drug therapy and another did not). Unintended effects were investigated in 6/72 (8%) studies. While 34 (47%) studies examined safety warnings on psychotropic drugs using an interrupted time series (ITS) design (53%), a before/after (26%), and a time series design (21%), 38 (53%) studied other substances using an ITS design (34%), a before/after (40%), and a time series design (26%). The proportion of an effective impact on drug therapy was lower in the "psychotropic drugs" group (23%) than in the "others" group (53%). CONCLUSION: Drug-related safety warnings induce intended and unintended effects. The included studies are of broadly varying methodological quality. To better compare their effectiveness, studies should be conducted using standardised procedures.
PURPOSE: The need for drug-related safety warnings is undisputed, and their impact should also be evaluated. This systematic review investigates and assesses the impact of safety warnings on drug therapy. METHODS: Studies published in English between January 1998 and December 2018 were searched in EMBASE and MEDLINE, complemented by manual search. Randomised controlled trials, cohort studies with a before/after component, and case-control studies were included, selected to predefined criteria, and assessed for their reporting and methodological quality. RESULTS: Out of 7454 references identified, 72 studies were included. A total of 28/72 (39%) studies described the impact of safety warnings on drug therapy as being effective, whereas 12/72 (17%) studies did not. Further, 26/72 (36%) studies described a partial implementation of the warnings (one part of the warning had an impact on drug therapy and another did not). Unintended effects were investigated in 6/72 (8%) studies. While 34 (47%) studies examined safety warnings on psychotropic drugs using an interrupted time series (ITS) design (53%), a before/after (26%), and a time series design (21%), 38 (53%) studied other substances using an ITS design (34%), a before/after (40%), and a time series design (26%). The proportion of an effective impact on drug therapy was lower in the "psychotropic drugs" group (23%) than in the "others" group (53%). CONCLUSION: Drug-related safety warnings induce intended and unintended effects. The included studies are of broadly varying methodological quality. To better compare their effectiveness, studies should be conducted using standardised procedures.
Keywords:
contraindications; drug interactions; drug-related side effects and adverse reactions; pharmacoepidemiology; pharmacovigilance; risk assessment
Authors: Aníbal García-Sempere; Isabel Hurtado; Salvador Peiró; Francisco Sánchez-Sáez; Clara Liliana Rodríguez-Bernal; Magda Puig-Ferrer; Manuel Escolano; Gabriel Sanfélix-Gimeno Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2022-04-05 Impact factor: 5.988
Authors: Ashleigh Hooimeyer; Alice Bhasale; Lucy Perry; Alice Fabbri; Annim Mohammad; Eliza McEwin; Barbara Mintzes Journal: Pharmacol Res Perspect Date: 2020-12
Authors: Esther de Vries; Elisabeth Bakker; Remy D C Francisca; Stijn Croonen; Petra Denig; Peter G M Mol Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2022-03-29 Impact factor: 5.228
Authors: Richard L Morrow; Barbara Mintzes; Patrick C Souverein; Christine E Hallgreen; Bilal Ahmed; Elizabeth E Roughead; Marie L De Bruin; Sarah Brøgger Kristiansen; Joel Lexchin; Anna Kemp-Casey; Ingrid Sketris; Dee Mangin; Sallie-Anne Pearson; Lorri Puil; Ruth Lopert; Lisa Bero; Danijela Gnjidic; Ameet Sarpatwari; Colin R Dormuth Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2022-04-19 Impact factor: 5.228
Authors: Richard L Morrow; Barbara Mintzes; Patrick C Souverein; Marie L De Bruin; Elizabeth Ellen Roughead; Joel Lexchin; Anna Kemp-Casey; Lorri Puil; Ingrid Sketris; Dee Mangin; Christine E Hallgreen; Sallie-Anne Pearson; Ruth Lopert; Lisa Bero; Richard Ofori-Asenso; Danijela Gnjidic; Ameet Sarpatwari; Lucy T Perry; Colin R Dormuth Journal: BMJ Qual Saf Date: 2022-01-20 Impact factor: 7.035