Analysis of interaction risks of patients with polypharmacy and the pharmacist interventions performed to solve them-A multicenter descriptive study according to medication reviews in Hungarian community pharmacies

A prospective intervention study to identify drug-related emergency department visits comparing a standard care group and a pharmaceutical care group

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE

Adverse drug reactions impose a major burden. Those adverse drug reactions might lead to hospitalization but are often not correctly identified in the emergency department (ED). Clinical pharmacists, although not routinely implemented, can help identify adverse drug reactions.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective was to examine the drug association of ED visits in a pharmaceutical group with a clinical pharmacist integrated in the ED team compared with a standard group without additional support.

DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

This prospective intervention study was performed in the ED of a tertiary care university hospital in Leipzig, Germany. Patients who were ≥50 years old were included. From 1 March 2020 to May 31, 2020 patients were enrolled in the standard group. From 1 March 2021 to 31 May 2021, the pharmaceutical group was enrolled. The clinical pharmacist supported the ED team with patient´s detailed medication history and medication analysis. In both groups, patients were evaluated whether their ED visit was drug-related.

OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS

The number of identified drug-related ED presentations were compared between the two groups. Interventions performed on adverse drug reaction management, causative drugs and patient characteristics were evaluated.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 798 patients were enrolled in the standard group and 827 patients in the pharmaceutical group. Patients whose ED visit was drug-related had a median age of 77 years [(Q25-Q75) 63.5-83.5] and took 7 [(Q25-Q75) 5-8] drugs in standard group. In the pharmaceutical group median age was 78 years [(Q25-Q75) 66-83] and number of drugs taken was 9 [(Q25-Q75) 5.25-11]. 31 (3.9%) drug-related ED visits were identified in the standard group compared to 104 (12.6%) in the pharmaceutical group (OR 3.56; 95% CI 2.35-5.38). An intervention on the patient's pharmacotherapy was performed in 16 drug-related ED visits in standard group compared to 77 in the pharmaceutical group.

CONCLUSION

In this study the implementation of a clinical pharmacist was associated with improved identification of drug-related ED visits. Discontinuations of causal medications and dose reductions were significantly higher in the pharmaceutical group compared to the standard care group.

Risk Factors for Potential Drug-Drug Interactions in Outpatients with Dyslipidemia

Background

Patients with dyslipidemia are usually multimorbid and require polypharmacy. Therefore, it is important to identify potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) in time to prevent their consequences. We aimed to identify and analyze risk factors contributing to their occurrence to guide health professionals.

Methods

A prospective cross-sectional study of 216 outpatients with dyslipidemia was conducted from May 2021 to April 2022 in Podgorica, the capital of Montenegro. pDDIs were identified using Medscape, Epocrates, and Drugs online interaction checkers. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to evaluate the potential predictors of interactions.

Results

pDDIs were detected in 212 (98.1%) participants, whereas pDDIs with high clinical significance were detected in 25.46%, 40.74%, and 58.8% of subjects by Drugs, Epocrates, and Medscape, respectively. Polypharmacy emerged as a risk factor for the occurrence of pDDIs in all three checkers in each category of clinical significance. The use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and antiplatelet drugs contributes to the incidence of severe pDDIs B=1.014, 95%CI 0.681-1.346, P=0.000 and B=0.492, 95%CI 0.286-0.698, P=0.000, by Epocrates and Medscape respectively. The number of prescribers per patient was a protective factor against moderate pDDI B= -0.858, 95%CI -1.572-(-0.144), P=0.019 and B= -0.956, 95%CI -1.671-(-0.241), P=0.009, by Medscape and Epocrates, respectively, but a risk factor for the occurrence of minor pDDIs B=0.373, 95%CI 0.033-0.712 P=0.032 and B=0.143, 95%CI 0.042-0.244, P=0.006, by the same checkers.

Conclusion

Knowledge of the risk factors contributing to the occurrence of pDDIs is important for the development and implementation of strategies for their prevention, and given the high prevalence of dyslipidemia, understanding these factors seems crucial nowadays.

Best practices for documentation of psychotropic drug-drug interactions in an adult psychiatric clinic

Introduction

Psychotropic drug-drug interactions (DDIs) contribute to adverse drug events, but many go undetected or unmanaged. Thorough documentation of potential DDIs can improve patient safety. The primary objective of this study is to determine the quality of and factors associated with documentation of DDIs in an adult psychiatric clinic run by postgraduate year 3 psychiatry residents (PGY3s).

Methods

A list of high-alert psychotropic medications was identified by consulting primary literature on DDIs and clinic records. Charts of patients prescribed these medications by PGY3 residents from July 2021 to March 2022 were reviewed to detect potential DDIs and assess documentation. Chart documentation of DDIs was noted as none, partial, or complete.

Results

Chart review identified 146 DDIs among 129 patients. Among the 146 DDIs, 65% were not documented, 24% were partially documented, and 11% had complete documentation. The percentage of pharmacodynamic interactions documented was 68.6% with 35.3% of pharmacokinetic interactions documented. Factors associated with partial or complete documentation included diagnosis of psychotic disorder (p = .003), treatment with clozapine (p = .02), treatment with benzodiazepine-receptor agonist (p < .01), and assumption of care during July (p = .04). Factors associated with no documentation include diagnosis of "other (primarily impulse control disorder)" (p < .01) and taking an enzyme-inhibiting antidepressant (p < .01).

Discussion

Investigators propose best practices for psychotropic DDI documentation: (1) description and potential outcome of DDI, (2) monitoring and management, (3) Patient education on DDI, and (4) patient response to DDI education. Strategies to improve DDI documentation quality include targeted provider education, incentives, and electronic medical record "DDI smart phrases."