Knowledge Assessment and Information Needs of Oncology Nurses Regarding Inpatient Medication

Drug-drug interactions in subjects enrolled in SWOG trials of oral chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer are at increased risk of drug-drug interactions (DDI), which can increase treatment toxicity or decrease efficacy. It is especially important to thoroughly screen DDI in oncology clinical trial subjects to ensure trial subject safety and data accuracy. This study determined the prevalence of potential DDI involving oral anti-cancer trial agents in subjects enrolled in two SWOG clinical trials.

METHODS

Completed SWOG clinical trials of commercially available agents with possible DDI that had complete concomitant medication information available at enrollment were included. Screening for DDI was conducted through three methods: protocol-guided screening, Lexicomp® screening, and pharmacist determination of clinical relevance. Descriptive statistics were calculated.

RESULTS

SWOG trials S0711 (dasatinib, n = 83) and S0528 (everolimus/lapatinib, n = 84) were included. Subjects received an average of 6.6 medications (standard deviation = 4.9, range 0-29) at enrollment. Based on the clinical trial protocols, at enrollment 18.6% (31/167) of subjects had a DDI and 12.0% (20/167) had a DDI that violated a protocol exclusion criterion. According to Lexicomp®, 28.7% of subjects (48/167) had a DDI classified as moderate or worse, whereas pharmacist review indicated that 7.2% of subjects (12/167) had a clinically relevant interaction. The majority of clinically relevant DDI identified were due to the coadministration of acid suppression therapies with dasatinib (83.3%, 10/12).

CONCLUSIONS

The high DDI prevalence in subjects enrolled on SWOG clinical trials, including a high prevalence that violate trial exclusion criteria, support the need for improved processes for DDI screening to ensure trial subject safety and trial data accuracy.

Three-month follow-up effects of a medication management program on nurses' knowledge

This quasi-experimental study examined the effects of a medication management program on nurses knowledge of medication management, three months after program completion. Fifty-seven nurses took a multiple-choice test both immediately after the program and three months later. Changes in test performance were assessed using McNemar's test and generalized estimating equations for binary outcomes. Test results were generally consistent from immediately post-program to three months later, though four items differed significantly. From immediately post-program to three months later, fewer nurses correctly answered the items: documenting no medication administration (98.2 vs 86.6, p = 0.04); documenting opioid administration (56.1 vs 33.3, p = 0.01); and observation after opioid administration (35.1 vs 19.3, p = 0.08. Significantly more nurses correctly answered the item concerning the pharmacology of medication administered with food (64.9 vs 77.2, p = 0.09). We recommend both continuous medication management training and focusing on the correspondence between theory-based knowledge and clinical practice routines.

Medication errors and drug knowledge gaps among critical-care nurses: a mixed multi-method study

BACKGROUND

Medication errors are a serious and complex problem in clinical practice, especially in intensive care units whose patients can suffer potentially very serious consequences because of the critical nature of their diseases and the pharmacotherapy programs implemented in these patients. The origins of these errors discussed in the literature are wide-ranging, although far-reaching variables are of particular special interest to those involved in training nurses. The main objective of this research was to study if the level of knowledge that critical-care nurses have about the use and administration of medications is related to the most common medication errors.

METHODS

This was a mixed (multi-method) study with three phases that combined quantitative and qualitative techniques. In phase 1 patient medical records were reviewed; phase 2 consisted of an interview with a focus group; and an ad hoc questionnaire was carried out in phase 3.

RESULTS

The global medication error index was 1.93%. The main risk areas were errors in the interval of administration of antibiotics (8.15% error rate); high-risk medication dilution, concentration, and infusion-rate errors (2.94% error rate); and errors in the administration of medications via nasogastric tubes (11.16% error rate).

CONCLUSIONS

Nurses have a low level of knowledge of the drugs they use the most and with which a greater number of medication errors are committed in the ICU.

Drug interaction screening in SWOG clinical trials

PURPOSE

The frequency and process for drug interaction (DI) screening at sites enrolling patients into SWOG clinical trials were studied.

METHODS

Survey invitations were e-mailed to 180 SWOG head clinical research associates to determine the frequency of and personnel involved in DI assessment in subjects who were screened for and enrolled in clinical trials at their sites. Descriptive statistics were performed to evaluate the data.

RESULTS

A total of 83 surveys recorded a response to at least 1 question, yielding an overall response rate of 46.1%. At least 72 completed surveys were submitted, for a completion rate of 40.0%. The majority of sites (51%) reported that DI screening only occurred during eligibility assessment when a DI was included in the protocol exclusion criteria. The pharmacist was "always" involved in DI screening during eligibility assessment at 17% of sites. Clinical research coordinators (56%) and research nurses (45%) were the predominant personnel who performed DI screening to assess eligibility for trial enrollment. A subset of sites (3-6%) reported not having access to a pharmacist. Fewer than 10% of sites reported that they "always" use drug information services, websites, resources, or literature searches, though many tools were used "often" or "sometimes" by more than 20% of sites.

CONCLUSION

A survey revealed that DI screening was not being systematically conducted within SWOG clinical trials. When DI screening did occur, it was primarily conducted by clinical research coordinators or study nurses. Pharmacist-led DI screening was not the current practice within SWOG sites surveyed and was precluded by a lack of pharmacists' availability or involvement.

Prevalence of drug-drug interactions in oncology patients enrolled on National Clinical Trials Network oncology clinical trials

Background

Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in subjects enrolling in clinical trials can impact not only safety of the patient but also study drug outcomes and data validity. This makes it critical to adequately screen and manage DDIs. The study objective was to determine the prevalence of DDIs involving study medications in subjects enrolling in National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) clinical trials at a single institution. DDIs were evaluated based on study protocol recommendations for concomitant medication use (i.e. exclude, avoid or use caution), screening via DDI tool, and pharmacist review.

Methods

Subjects enrolled in NCTN trials of commercially available agents between January 2013 and August 2017 were included if a complete medication list was available. Complete medication lists were collected from the date of enrollment or the next available date then screened utilizing protocol guidance and the DDI screening tool, Lexicomp® Drug Interactions (Wolters Kluwer, Hudson, OH). Interactions were reviewed for clinical relevance: defined as a DDI that would require a medication change to ensure study agent safety and efficacy at enrollment.

Results

One hundred and twenty-eight subjects enrolled in 35 clinical trials were included. Protocol guidance detected 15 unique DDI pairs that should be avoided or used with caution in 10.2% (13/128) of subjects. The majority of these subjects did not have a clinically relevant DDI (69.2%, 9/13) based on pharmacist review. Lexicomp® detected moderate to major DDIs in 24.2% (31/128) of subjects, with 9.4% (12/128) having a clinically relevant DDI.

Conclusions

This study confirms a high prevalence of DDIs present in subjects enrolling in oncology clinical trials. Further efforts should be made to improve methods to detect and manage DDIs in patients enrolling on clinical trials to ensure patient safety and trial data validity.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-018-5076-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Oncology nurses awareness of drug interactions

Objective:

The aim of this study was to determine oncology nurses awareness of drug interactions.

Methods:

This descriptive study was conducted with nurses working in the oncology clinics who are a member of Oncology Nursing Association of Turkey. A total of 115 nurses (response rate %20) were responded to the online survey that consists of 28 questions.

Results:

The mean age of the nurses was 33 ± 6.8. The majority of nurses work in university hospital (60%) as a clinical nurse (62.6%) and have a Bachelor Degree in Nursing (63.5%). The mean working years in oncology was 4 years. Half of them stated receiving information on drug interactions mostly through in-service education and courses/congresses in last 5 years. The majority of them (84.3%) indicated that they are considering the possibility of drug interactions when they are scheduling the medication administration time. More than half of the responders (59.1%) encountered drug interactions; however, few explored drug interactions with food, drinks, and nutritional supplements. Their practices to assess possibility of drug interactions were reviewing the drug prospectus (78.3%); consulting with their colleagues (58.3%) and searching on the available website (42.6%) and looking at the drug interaction (39.1%). More than half (65.2%) stated lack of any system to identify drug interactions in their workplace. Nearly half of them indicated to including the drug interaction into patient education mostly for food-drug (73.9%) and drug-drug (63.5%) interactions.

Conclusions:

Almost all indicated the needs for further education on drug interactions and suggested to have guideline/packet guide.