Systematic literature review of the methodology for developing pharmacotherapeutic interchange guidelines and their implementation in hospitals and ambulatory care settings

PURPOSE

To summarize literature specific to therapeutic interchange (TI) focusing on methodological approaches in order to develop a list of steps that healthcare facilities can consult when developing pharmacotherapeutic interchange guidelines (PTIGs) in hospitals and primary care centers.

METHODS

A search was conducted in PreMEDLINE, Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library up to and including December 2015. PRISMA guidelines were used. The inclusion criteria were articles published on TI: methodology, implementation, guidelines, and position statements of scientific societies. Two authors independently reviewed all articles for eligibility and extracted the data.

RESULTS

A total of 102 articles were selected for full-text review; we included three guidelines on how to effect TI, nine position papers of various scientific societies with regard to TI, two articles dealt exclusively about methodology, three articles consisted of recommendations and perspectives on TI, three articles dealt with legal aspects, four articles examined general implementation procedures, two articles were a post-discharge follow-up of patients who had TI, six were surveys referring to TI, and three were articles on the use of TI in ambulatory care The remaining 67 articles focused on therapeutic groups. Study quality was generally low.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identified articles on TI as published guidelines, recommendations, and studies on TI carried out in hospital settings. As a result, eight fundamental steps were established for obtaining adequate results in the development of TI programs.

Therapeutic Interchange of Parenteral Anticoagulants: Challenges for Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committees

This is a review of key factors for pharmacy and therapeutics committees to consider when developing a therapeutic interchange (TI) program for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. Recent patient safety initiatives aimed at reducing the incidence of hospital-acquired VTE may increase the prescribing of thromboprophylactic agents recommended in VTE management guidelines. As a result, more pharmacy and therapeutics committees may consider TI programs for parenteral anticoagulants. However, the TI of anticoagulants appears challenging at this time. Firstly, the therapeutic equivalence of the commonly prescribed parenteral anticoagulants, enoxaparin, dalteparin and fondaparinux, has not been established. Secondly, because of the wide range of clinical indications for these anticoagulants, a blanket agent-specific TI program could lead to off-label use. Use of an indication-specific TI program could be difficult to manage administratively, and may cause prescribing confusion and errors. Thirdly, careful dosing and contraindications of certain parenteral anticoagulants in special patient populations, such as those with renal impairment, further impact the suitability of these agents for inclusion in TI programs. Finally, although TI may appear to offer lower drug-acquisition costs, it is important to determine its effect on all cost parameters and ultimately ensure that the care of patients requiring VTE prophylaxis is not compromised.

Factors that influence prescribing within a therapeutic drug class

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The decision to prescribe one drug instead of another within the same therapeutic class may be influenced by a variety of drug-related, direct, or indirect factors; but little is known about which considerations are most important in such choices. The low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) represent a class of drugs that are commonly used and for which therapeutic equivalence has been debated in the literature. The purpose of this study was to identify and compare factors perceived by doctors and clinical pharmacists to be influential in prescribing decisions among LMWHs.

METHODS

Doctors and clinical pharmacists were interviewed to elicit information and to rank factors that influence the prescribing and use of LMWHs in community hospitals in the United States. For each factor, the mean and median of the rating were determined along with the frequency distribution across ratings. The non-parametric Mann-Whitney U-test was used to examine differences between doctors and clinical pharmacists.

RESULTS

Both groups considered efficacy, formulary status, and policies restricting drug use to be highly influential in the decision to use one LMWH instead of another. Compared to clinical pharmacists, doctors rated personal experience as more influential, whereas they rated drug cost and prescribing guidelines lower.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that doctors and clinical pharmacists differentiate between LMWHs based on differences between products and because of hospital administrative programs (such as drug formularies). This information may be of value in designing programs to alter medication use.