Checklist for standardized reporting of drug–drug interaction management guidelines

Floor-Schreudering, Annemieke; Geerts, A.; Aronson, Jeffrey K; Bouvy, Marcel L.; Ferner, Robin E; Smet, Peter A. G. M. De

doi:10.1007/s00228-013-1612-7

Cited by 19 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…That said, the DRIVE instrument or other approaches should be incorporated into the process to provide clinicians a clear rating of the overall quality of evidence, with graded recommendations for clinical management. 34 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…34,38 It also will be important to present the hierarchy of graded risk management recommendations in a manner that is comprehensible to a wide range of users. 39 The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach has been adapted to DDIs and could be further refined for this process.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based in part on recommendations by Floor-Schreudering et al , 34 we formulated a list of information to be included, along with the interacting drug pairs, in a standard set of DDIs to optimally guide clinicians in mitigating or preventing harm. These include: (1) classification of seriousness; (2) clinical consequences; (3) frequency of harm and exposure; (4) modifying factors; (5) interaction mechanism; (6) recommended action (with strength of recommendations); and (7) evidence (with quality ratings).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the near term, frequency is unlikely to be a commonly populated field, but clinicians should be informed that the rate of adverse events is unknown when not available. 34 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Recommendations for selecting drug–drug interactions for clinical decision support

Tilson

Hines²,

McEvoy

et al. 2016

American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To recommend principles for including drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in clinical decision support. Methods A conference series was conducted to improve clinical decision support (CDS) for DDIs. The Content Workgroup met monthly by webinar from January 2013 to February 2014, with two in-person meetings to reach consensus. The workgroup consisted of 20 experts in pharmacology, drug information, and CDS from academia, government agencies, health information (IT) vendors, and healthcare organizations. Workgroup members addressed four key questions: (1) What process should be used to develop and maintain a standard set of DDIs?; (2) What information should be included in a knowledgebase of standard DDIs?; (3) Can/should a list of contraindicated drug pairs be established?; and (4) How can DDI alerts be more intelligently filtered? Results To develop and maintain a standard set of DDIs for CDS in the United States, we recommend a transparent, systematic, and evidence-driven process with graded recommendations by a consensus panel of experts and oversight by a national organization. We outline key DDI information needed to help guide clinician decision-making. We recommend judicious classification of DDIs as contraindicated, as only a small set of drug combinations are truly contraindicated. Finally, we recommend more research to identify methods to safely reduce repetitive and less relevant alerts. Conclusion A systematic ongoing process is necessary to select DDIs for alerting clinicians. We anticipate that our recommendations can lead to consistent and clinically relevant content for interruptive DDIs, and thus reduce alert fatigue and improve patient safety.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the near term, frequency is unlikely to be a commonly populated field, but clinicians should be informed that the rate of adverse events is unknown when not available. 34 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Recommendations for selecting drug–drug interactions for clinical decision support

Tilson

Hines²,

McEvoy

et al. 2016

American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Adequate monitoring requires that the instructions are clear with respect to what to monitor, when to start monitoring, when to stop monitoring, the frequency of monitoring, what the critical value is and how to respond (Floor-Schreudering et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Instructions for clinical and biomarker monitoring in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) for psychotropic drugs: Overview and applicability in clinical practice

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) for psychotropic drugs includes instructions for clinical and biomarker monitoring intended to optimise effectiveness and minimise harm. The present study evaluated which monitoring instructions are given in the SmPCs, and assessed whether instructions are informative enough to be applicable in clinical practice. Monitoring instructions were collected from complete SmPCs for psychotropic drugs (n=70). Reasons and requirements for monitoring were assessed and somatic parameters were distinguished from non-somatic parameters. Instructions were evaluated using the Systematic Information for Monitoring (SIM) score and considered applicable when a SIM score of ⩾ 3 was found. An average of 3.3 (range 0-13) instructions per drug label was found. Monitoring was primarily for safety reasons (78%). Requirement was predominantly mandatory (71%). Somatic parameters were most often mentioned (80%). Only 34% of the instructions were determined applicable. Overall, an average SIM score of 2.0 (SD=1.7) was found (out of a maximum possible score of 6). In conclusion, prescribing of psychotropic drugs is accompanied by diverse instructions aimed at improving safe use. However, most instructions on monitoring do not provide sufficient information to be applicable in clinical practice.

show abstract

Nature and frequency of drug therapy alerts generated by clinical decision support in community pharmacy

Heringa

Floor-Schreudering

Tromp³

et al. 2015

Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The investigated CDSS in Dutch community pharmacy generated one or more drug therapy alerts in nearly half of the processed prescriptions. The majority of alerts were concentrated in a minority of therapeutic drug groups and patients. To decrease the alert burden, CDSS improvements should be directed at the prioritization and integration of drug therapy alerts for these therapeutic groups within patients.

show abstract

Checklist for standardized reporting of drug–drug interaction management guidelines

Abstract: It was possible to reach a broad consensus on which relevant items should be included in a checklist for the development of DDI management guidelines.

Cited by 19 publications

References 28 publications

Recommendations for selecting drug–drug interactions for clinical decision support

Recommendations for selecting drug–drug interactions for clinical decision support

Instructions for clinical and biomarker monitoring in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) for psychotropic drugs: Overview and applicability in clinical practice

Nature and frequency of drug therapy alerts generated by clinical decision support in community pharmacy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About