↓ Skip to main content

Risk factors for QTc-prolongation: systematic review of the evidence

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
5 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
157 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
194 Mendeley
Title
Risk factors for QTc-prolongation: systematic review of the evidence
Published in
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, December 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11096-016-0414-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eline Vandael, Bert Vandenberk, Joris Vandenberghe, Rik Willems, Veerle Foulon

Abstract

Background QTc-interval prolongation has been associated with serious adverse events, such as Torsade de Pointes and sudden cardiac death. In the prevention of QTc-prolongation, special attention should go to high-risk patients. Aim of the review The aim of this review is to summarize and assess the evidence for different risk factors for QTc-prolongation (demographic factors, comorbidities, electrolytes, QTc-prolonging medication). Methods Potential studies were retrieved based on a systematic search of articles published until June 2015 in the databases Medline and Embase. Both terms about QTc-prolongation/Torsade de Pointes and risk factors were added in the search strategy. The following inclusion criteria were applied: randomized controlled trials and observational studies; inclusion of ≥500 patients from a general population (not limited to specific disease states); assessment of association between QTc-interval and risk factors. For the articles that met the inclusion criteria, the following data were extracted: study design, setting and study population, number of patients and cases of QTc-prolongation, method of electrocardiogram-monitoring, QTc-correction formula, definition of QTc-prolongation, statistical methods and results. Quality assessment was performed using the GRADE approach (for randomized controlled trials) and the STROBE-recommendations (for observational studies). Based on the number of significant results and the level of significance, a quotation of the evidence was allocated. Results Ten observational studies could be included, with a total of 89,532 patients [prospective cohort design: N = 6; multiple regression analyses: N = 5; median STROBE score = 17/22 (range 15-18)]. Very strong evidence was found for hypokalemia, use of diuretics, antiarrhythmic drugs and QTc-prolonging drugs of list 1 of CredibleMeds. Little or no evidence was found for hyperlipidemia, the use of digoxin or statins, neurological disorders, diabetes, renal failure, depression, alcohol abuse, heart rate, pulmonary disorders, hormone replacement therapy, hypomagnesemia, history of a prolonged QTc-interval/Torsade de Pointes, familial history of cardiovascular disease, and the use of only QTc-prolonging drugs of list 2 or 3 of CredibleMeds. Conclusion This systematic review gives a clear overview of the available evidence for a broad range of risk factors for QTc-prolongation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 194 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 15%
Researcher 26 13%
Student > Bachelor 25 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 10%
Student > Postgraduate 14 7%
Other 41 21%
Unknown 39 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 79 41%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 24 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 5%
Psychology 9 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Other 19 10%
Unknown 50 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 March 2024.
All research outputs
#7,126,547
of 25,608,265 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#474
of 1,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,043
of 423,783 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#6
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,608,265 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,592 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 423,783 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.