November 8, 2014
Notes: Futamura, Masaki
Thomas, Kim S
Grindlay, Douglas J C
Doney, Elizabeth J
Williams, Hywel C
RP-PG-0407-10177/Department of Health/United Kingdom
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t
PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e58484. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0058484. Epub 2013 Mar 11.
Author Address: Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, University of Nottingham, King’s Meadow Campus, Nottingham, United Kingdom. email@example.com
Reference Type: Journal Article
Record Number: 4345Author: Ganeva, M., Gancheva, T., Troeva, J., Kiriyak, N. and Hristakieva, E.
Title: Clinical relevance of drug-drug interactions in hospitalized dermatology patients
Journal: Adv Clin Exp Med
Short Title: Clinical relevance of drug-drug interactions in hospitalized dermatology patients
Alternate Journal: Advances in clinical and experimental medicine : official organ Wroclaw Medical University
ISSN: 1899-5276 (Print)
Accession Number: 23986216
*Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems
Aged, 80 and over
*Medical Order Entry Systems
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs) are known to be a risk factor for the development of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Data on the occurrence of ADRs related to DDIs is scarce and comes from different groups of patients. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate the frequency, nature and determinants of potential DDIs in hospitalized dermatology patients and assess their contribution for the development of ADRs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective observational study comprising all consecutive inpatients admitted to the Clinic of Dermatology and Venereology, University Hospital, Stara Zagora for the period March 2009 – August 2011 was carried out. Systemic medication was screened for potential DDIs using an electronic drug interactions checker. DDIs were then verified with Stockley’s Drug Interactions and divided into “clinically important” and “clinically unimportant”. ADRs were classified by clinical manifestation, type and severity. Causality was scored according to Naranjo et al. (1981). RESULTS: The study included 674 patients, 513 (76.1%) of them with established comorbidities. Totally, 504 potential DDIs were identified (441 “clinically important” and 63 “clinically unimportant”) in 236 patients. Hypotension was the most common expected clinical presentation of the potential DDIs. The strongest predictor for the development of DDIs was the number of systemic drugs (OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.97-2.58). Overall 43 ADRs were recorded, 53.5% “type B” and 46.5% “type A” reactions, most commonly with cutaneous and cardiovascular manifestations. The development of ADRs was attributed to 13 DDIs (2.6% of all detected potential DDIs) in 10 of these cases (23.25%). CONCLUSIONS: Potential DDIs were frequent in hospitalized dermatology patients. The drug groups most commonly involved were cardiovascular drugs. The proportion of DDIs associated with the occurrence of ADRs was relatively low, but close monitoring of patients on multiple drug regimens is essential because these reactions may be severe.