| Title |
Potential drug–drug interactions in oncological adult inpatients at a Spanish hospital: epidemiology and risk factors
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11096-015-0195-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mª Ángeles Fernández de Palencia Espinosa, Mª Sacramento Díaz Carrasco, José Luis Alonso Romero, Amelia de la Rubia Nieto, Alberto Espuny Miró |
| Abstract |
Background Oncological patients are at high risk for drug-drug interactions (DDIs), which may contribute to therapeutic failure or lead to serious adverse events. Objective To determine the prevalence of potential DDIs in medication lists, to describe the most frequent DDIs and to investigate the possible risk factors associated with them. A prospective cohort study was performed at the Oncology Department of a tertiary hospital over a 12-week period. Twice a week, every inpatient's treatment sheet was collected and screened through two databases: Micromedex™ and Drug Interaction Facts™. All identified potential DDIs with a moderate or higher severity rating were recorded. Multivariate analysis was used to identify risk factors associated with DDIs. Result A total of 1956 DDIs were detected in 699 treatment sheets. The prevalence of treatment sheets with DDIs was 81.0 % and 32.6 % by Micromedex™ and Drug Interaction Facts™, respectively. Central nervous depressant agents and antiemetics were the most commonly involved groups in DDIs. A higher number of non-antineoplastic drugs was related with potential DDIs [adjusted-OR 1.398 and 1.613 by Micromedex™ and Drug Interaction Facts™, respectively]. Conclusion The prevalence of potential DDIs was widely variable among databases. The main risk factor associated with DDIs was a higher number of non-antineoplastic medicines. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 27% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 17% |
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 12 | 40% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 33% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 September 2015.
All research outputs
#14,238,817
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#690
of 1,080 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,773
of 274,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#11
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,080 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 274,256 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.