| Title |
Study of warfarin utilization in hospitalized patients: analysis of possible drug interactions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11096-016-0336-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Camilo Molino Guidoni, Helen Palmira Miranda Camargo, Paulo Roque Obreli-Neto, Edmarlon Girotto, Leonardo Regis Leira Pereira |
| Abstract |
Background Drug-drug interactions in patients taking warfarin may contribute to a higher risk of adverse events. Objective To identify and evaluate the prevalence and characteristics of potential DDIs with warfarin. Methods A cross-sectional study was performed in a Brazilian tertiary hospital. The electronic prescriptions of the patients receiving warfarin between January 2004 and December 2010 were analyzed. Socio-demographic, clinical, and therapeutic variables were collected. Warfarin drug-drug interactions were classified as either risk A, B, C, D, or X according to the Lexi-Interact™ Online database. Results A total of 3048 patients were identified who were prescribed warfarin. Of the 154,161 total drug prescriptions issued, 42,120 (27.3 %) were for warfarin. Evaluation of the prescriptions showed that 63.1 and 0.1 % of patients received concomitant drugs classified as having class D or X risk. It was found that 20,539 (48.7 %) prescriptions had at least one drug with a D or X risk. Patients were prescribed an average of 1.4 (±0.4) concomitant medications with a class D or X warfarin-DDI risk, the most frequent being acetylsalicylic acid and amiodarone. Conclusion The results demonstrate a high prevalence of concomitant drug prescriptions with the potential for clinically relevant DDIs with warfarin, the most frequent being acetylsalicylic acid and amiodarone. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Professor | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 12 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 26% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 19% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 11 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 29 January 2019.
All research outputs
#12,901,304
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#579
of 1,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,013
of 351,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#14
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,091 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 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 351,542 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 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 50% of its contemporaries.