ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2000
Drug interactions avoided-a useful indicator of good prescribing practice.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adherence to guidelines for avoiding drug interactions associated with warfarin--a Nationwide Swedish Register Study.PloS one · 2014Article
- Factor analysis improves the selection of prescribing indicators.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2006Article
- Gas6 regulates mesangial cell proliferation through Axl in experimental glomerulonephritis.The American journal of pathology · 2001Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo develop an index of quality prescribing in general practice by investigating the incidence of potential drug interactions when medicines were coprescribed within the State supported General Medical Services (GMS) in Ireland.
methodsWe determined an odds ratio (OR), as a measure of the relative risk of being exposed to a potential interaction, comparing the use of the H2-receptor antagonist, cimetidine, with that of the noninteracting agents ranitidine, famotidine and nizatidine in users and nonusers of warfarin, phenytoin and theophylline. RESULTS AND
conclusionsIn 86 510 prescriptions for the H2-receptor antagonists potentially interacting drugs were dispensed to 8188 (9%) patients in the Eastern Health Board Region of the GMS. We found that prescribers were significantly less likely to use cimetidine (OR = 0.20,95% CI 0. 17-0.21, P < 0.001) in those patients who were coprescribed warfarin, suggesting good prescribing practice within the GMS. Similarly there was preferential use of the noninteracting H2-receptor antagonists in patients receiving phenytoin or theophylline and the extent of this selective prescribing was in keeping with the rank order of severity of interaction with these drugs. This novel pharmacological index may be a sensitive marker of good prescribing practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.