Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20213374›Full record

ArticleWiener klinische Wochenschrift2010

Potential drug-drug interactions and admissions due to drug-drug interactions in patients treated in medical departments.

Nina Fokter, Martin Mozina, Miran Brvar

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Drug-drug interaction software in clinical practice: a systematic review.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2015
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Drug-drug interactions in polypharmacy patients: The impact of renal impairment.Current research in pharmacology and drug discovery · 2021
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nina FokterMedical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Martin Mozina
Miran Brvar
Ljubljana University Medical Centre · SIUniversity of Ljubljana · SI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAdverse drug reactions due to drug-drug interactions (DDIs) are important in drug safety. The aim of this study was to check potential DDIs (pDDIs) on hospital admission and discharge and to evaluate admissions due to DDIs in medical departments of a primary city and tertiary referral hospital.

methodsAge, sex, presence of renal and liver failure, drug information, diagnosis, and urgency and reason for admission were retrospectively recorded in 520 randomly selected patients in medical departments of the University Medical Center Ljubljana. The screening program Drug-Reax was used to check for pDDIs in patients with drug information on both admission and discharge home, and the proportion of patients admitted as the consequence of a DDI was estimated.

resultsOverall, 14.6% (76/520) of patients had incomplete information on drug names in their medical documentation on admission; at the end of treatment 12.5% (52/416) of patients were discharged home with incomplete information on drug names in their discharge letters. A total of 323 patients had complete information on drug names on both admission and discharge and were included in the analysis of pDDIs: 51% (166/323) of patients on admission and 63% (204/323) on discharge had at least one pDDI (P = 0.001). Major pDDIs were found in 13% (41/323) of patients on admission and 18% (59/323) on discharge (P = 0.001). An ACE inhibitor combined with spironolactone was the most common major pDDI, representing 20.0% of all pDDIs on admission and 25.6% on discharge. Among patients with pDDI on admission, 2.4% (4/166) of were admitted because of an ADR caused by a DDI. Overall, 1.2% (4/323) of patients were admitted as the consequence of a DDI.

conclusionsThe information on patient medication on hospital admission and discharge is incomplete. Half of patients on admission and almost two-thirds on discharge had pDDIs. ADRs due to DDIs caused 1.2% of admissions to medical departments in Ljubljana's primary city and tertiary referral hospital.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleHumansIncidenceMiddle AgedPatient AdmissionPatient DischargeRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsSloveniaYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID20213374
OpenAlexW190367897

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.