Clinical decision support tools: analysis of online drug information databases

Clauson, Kevin A.; Marsh, Wallace; Polen, Hyla H; Seamon, Matthew J.; Ortiz, Blanca I

doi:10.1186/1472-6947-7-7

Cited by 95 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although it was not This study echoed previous published results. Similar to one prior study, it was determined that Micromedex Drug Interactions and Lexicomp Interactions scored highest for completeness [4]. Results also were similar to the study of infectious diseases-related drug information questions, where Micromedex Drug Interactions scored highest; however, that study also found high scores for DailyMed and Medscape Drug Reference, which are free online databases [5].…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 62%

“…Based on previous similar studies that evaluated drug information databases for answering general [4] and infectious diseases [5] drug information questions, it was determined that approximately 100 drug-drug and drug-dietary supplement interactions would provide a sufficient sample size to analyze scope, completeness, ease of use, and consistency among resources. Published review articles focusing on clinically relevant interactions [13,14], a practicebased research report focusing on minimizing clinical impact of drug interactions [15], and a wellrecognized textbook [16] were used to identify an initial list of potential interactions for analysis to be sure that representative interactions were selected.…”

Section: Thismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five endpoints were developed in order to address the study objectives based on similar previous studies [4,5]. First, each resource was scored for scope (i.e., does the resource contain an entry for the interaction?)…”

Section: Thismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In one study, fifteen categories of drug information questions, which included drug-drug interactions, were used to determine the highest ranked database based on scope, completeness, and ease of use [4]. Completeness was based on a three-point scale for drug interactions and varied amongst all databases, with Micromedex having the highest score, followed by Clinical Pharmacology and Lexicomp.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of resources for analyzing drug interactions

Patel

Beckett

2016

J Med Libr Assoc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 62%

Section: Thismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Thismentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of resources for analyzing drug interactions

Patel

Beckett

2016

J Med Libr Assoc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Three DI sources were used: Micromedex® Healthcare Series online, Epocrates© online (free version) and Stockley's© Drug Interactions [5,6,7]. These sources were selected because they have good performance rankings in terms of sensitivity, specificity, completeness or ease of use [23,28,29,30,31]. A selection of the most clinically relevant DIs was done.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential Interactions with Anticancer Agents: A Cross-Sectional Study

Mouzon¹,

Kerger²,

D’Hondt³

et al. 2013

Chemotherapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Patients with cancer are particularly susceptible to drug interactions (DIs), but the extent of the problem has received limited attention. We aimed to evaluate the frequency of interactions with anticancer agents in a group of cancer patients. Methods: The study was performed in a Belgian teaching hospital. One hundred and twenty-two patients with solid malignancies were included. A comprehensive drug history was performed by a clinical pharmacist. Three renowned DI compendia were used to identify DIs. Results: Forty-one potential interactions involving an anticancer agent and considered to be clinically significant were identified among 25% of patients. The anticancer drugs mostly involved were cisplatin and methotrexate, and the most frequent co-medications involved were vitamin K antagonists, proton pump inhibitors and diuretics. In the majority of cases, the potential adverse consequence was increased toxicity of the anticancer agent and/or of the co-medication. Less than 10% of DIs were identified by the three compendia. Conclusions: Preventive measures should be taken to avoid increased toxicity or decreased efficacy of the drugs. Most of the time, this simply involves surveillance of biological or clinical parameters. Collaboration with a clinical pharmacist may be useful for the prescribing physician.

show abstract

Dosing Recommendations for Pediatric Patients With Renal Impairment

Al-khouja

Park

Anderson

et al. 2020

The Journal of Clinical Pharma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A treatment gap exists for pediatric patients with renal impairment. Alterations in renal clearance and metabolism of drugs render standard dosage regimens inappropriate and may lead to drug toxicity, but these studies are not routinely conducted during drug development. The objective of this study was to examine the clinical evidence behind current renal impairment dosage recommendations for pediatric patients in a standard pediatric dosing handbook. The sources of recommendations and comparisons included the pediatric dosing handbook (Lexicomp), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved manufacturer's labels, and published studies in the literature. One hundred twenty-six drugs in Lexicomp had pediatric renal dosing recommendations. Only 14% (18 of 126) of Lexicomp pediatric renal dosing recommendations referenced a pediatric clinical study, and 15% of manufacturer's labels (19 of 126) described specific dosing regimens for renally impaired pediatric patients. Forty-two products had published information on pediatric renal dosing, but 19 (45%) were case studies. When pediatric clinical studies were not referenced in Lexicomp, the renal dosing recommendations followed the adult and pediatric dosing recommendations on the manufacturer's label. Clinical evidence in pediatric patients does not exist for most renal dosing recommendations in a widely used pediatric dosing handbook, and the adult renal dosing recommendations from the manufacturer's label are currently the primary source of pediatric renal dosing information.

show abstract

Clinical decision support tools: analysis of online drug information databases

Cited by 95 publications

References 14 publications

Evaluation of resources for analyzing drug interactions

Evaluation of resources for analyzing drug interactions

Potential Interactions with Anticancer Agents: A Cross-Sectional Study

Dosing Recommendations for Pediatric Patients With Renal Impairment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About