Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23483444›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2013

Potential drug-drug interactions in internal medicine wards in hospital setting in Pakistan.

Mohammad Ismail, Zafar Iqbal, Muhammad Bilal Khattak, Muhammad Imran Khan, Hassan Arsalan, Arshad Javaid, Qamar Gul, Faramoz Khan

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  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

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Mohammad IsmailDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Peshawar, Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.
Zafar Iqbal
Muhammad Bilal Khattak
Muhammad Imran Khan
Hassan Arsalan
Arshad Javaid
Qamar Gul
Faramoz Khan
Ayub Medical College · PKUniversity of Peshawar · PKKhyber Teaching Hospital · PKLady Reading Hospital · PKSarhad University of Science and Information Technology · PKUniversity of Malakand · PK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMultiple drugs therapies may be the potential source of drug-drug interactions that can result in alteration of therapeutic response and/or increase untoward effects of many drugs.

objectiveTo identify the frequency and levels of potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) in internal medicine wards and their association with patients' age, gender, length of hospital stay and number of prescribed medications; and to describe management of frequently identified major or moderate pDDIs.

settingInternal medicine wards of two major tertiary care hospitals of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.

methodMicromedex Drug-Reax system was used to screen patient's profiles for pDDIs. Logistic regression was applied to determine the odds ratio for specific risk factors of pDDIs i.e., age, gender, hospital-stay and number of medications.

main outcome measureOverall prevalence and prevalence of contraindicated, major, moderate and minor pDDIs; levels of pDDIs; frequently identified major or moderate interactions; and odds ratios for risk factors.

resultsTotal, 188 interacting drug-combinations were identified that contributed to 675 pDDIs. Of 400 patients, 52.8% patients were presented with at least one pDDI (overall prevalence), 21.3% with at least one major-pDDI, and 44.3% with at least one moderate-pDDI. Of 675 pDDIs, most were of moderate (63.6%) or major severity (23%); good (61.2%) or fair (25.5%) type of scientific evidence; and delayed onset (50.2%). Most frequently identified major or moderate interactions resulted in 45.3% of all pDDIs. Their potential adverse outcomes included hepatotoxicity, bleeding, ototoxicity, nephrotoxicity, hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, risk of thrombosis, hypotension, cardiac arrhythmias and reduction in therapeutic-effectiveness. There was significant association of the occurrence of pDDIs with patients' age of 60 years or more (OR = 2.1; 95% CI = 1.3-3.3; p = 0.003), hospital stay of 6 days or longer (OR = 2.6; 95% CI = 1.5-4.5; p = 0.001), and seven or more number of prescribed medications (OR = 5.9; 95% CI = 3.6-9.6; p < 0.001).

conclusionThe present study has recorded a high prevalence of pDDIs in internal medicine wards. Patients with old age, longer hospital stay and increased number of prescribed medications were at higher risk.

Indexed as

Drug InteractionsLength of StayAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHospital DepartmentsHumansInternal MedicineLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedPakistanPrescription Drugs

Identifiers

PMID23483444
OpenAlexW2068230945

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.