Prevalence of clinically manifested drug interactions in hospitalized patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Tâmara Natasha Gonzaga de Andrade Santos, Givalda Mendonça da Cruz Macieira, Bárbara Manuella Cardoso Sodré Alves, Thelma Onozato, Geovanna Cunha Cardoso, Mônica Thaís Ferreira Nascimento, Paulo Ricardo Saquete Martins-Filho, Divaldo Pereira de Lyra and Alfredo Dias de Oliveira Filho

PLOS ONE, 2020, vol. 15, issue 7, 1-14

Abstract: Aims: This review aims to determine the prevalence of clinically manifested drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in hospitalized patients. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and Lilacs databases were used to identify articles published before June 2019 that met specific inclusion criteria. The search strategy was developed using both controlled and uncontrolled vocabulary related to the following domains: “drug interactions,” “clinically relevant,” and “hospital.” In this review, we discuss original observational studies that detected DDIs in the hospital setting, studies that provided enough data to allow us to calculate the prevalence of clinically manifested DDIs, and studies that described the drugs prescribed or provided DDI adverse reaction reports, published in either English, Portuguese, or Spanish. Results: From the initial 5,999 articles identified, 10 met the inclusion criteria. The pooled prevalence of clinically manifested DDIs was 9.2% (CI 95% 4.0–19.7). The mean number of medications per patient reported in six studies ranged from 4.0 to 9.0, with an overall average of 5.47 ± 1.77 drugs per patient. The quality of the included studies was moderate. The main methods used to identify clinically manifested DDIs were evaluating medical records and ward visits (n = 7). Micromedex® (27.7%) and Lexi-Comp® (27.7%) online reference databases were commonly used to detect DDIs and none of the studies evaluated used more than one database for this purpose. Conclusions: This systematic review showed that, despite the significant prevalence of potential DDIs reported in the literature, less than one in ten patients were exposed to a clinically manifested drug interaction. The use of causality tools to identify clinically manifested DDIs as well as clinical adoption of DDI lists based on actual adverse outcomes that can be identified through the implementation of real DDI notification systems is recommended to reduce the incidence of alert fatigue, enhance decision-making for DDI prevention or resolution, and, consequently, contribute to patient safety.

Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0235353 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 35353&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0235353

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235353

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone (plosone@plos.org).