ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2014
Identification and evaluation of drug-supplement interactions in Hungarian hospital patients.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative evaluation of artificial intelligence platforms and drug interaction screening databases using real-world patient data.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2025Article
- Survey of Potential Drug Interactions, Use of Non-Medical Health Products, and Immunization Status among Patients Receiving Targeted Therapies.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Cancer patients' behaviors and attitudes toward natural health products.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2023Article
- Potential Drug-Drug Interactions among Patients with Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders: Prevalence, Association with Risk Factors, and Replicate Analysis in 2021.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Observational
- Countrywide prevalence of critical drug interactions in Hungarian outpatients: a retrospective analysis of pharmacy dispensing data.BMC pharmacology & toxicology · 2019Article
- Potential drug interactions with dietary and herbal supplements during hospitalization.Internal and emergency medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe increasing number of patients taking supplementary products together with prescribed medicines has become a new challenge for health care systems. These products may influence therapy outcomes by inducing unwanted effects. Particularly concerning is the potential for harmful interactions between prescribed medicines and supplementary products.
objectiveThe aims of the study were to evaluate supplement use, to identify and analyse potential interactions, and to assess the efficiency of computerised interaction screening.
settingParticipants of the study were inpatients and outpatients of a Hungarian university hospital.
methodA cross-sectional point-of-care survey of 200 patients was carried out. Data was collected through personal interviews and a review of the medical records. Drug-drug, drug-supplement and supplement-supplement interactions were analysed with three interaction databases (Lexi-Interact Online, Medscape Drug Interaction Checker and Mediris).
main outcome measurePrevalence of supplementary product use, number of medicines and supplementary products per patient, procurement sources of products, number of potentially severe interactions.
resultsThere was a marked difference between data obtained from patient interviews and the medical records. 85.5 % of the surveyed patients took supplementary products during the 2 weeks prior to the interview. The average number of prescribed medicines and supplementary products were 7.8 and 2.5, respectively. Women were more likely to take supplements than men. There was no significant difference in supplement use between patients under or over 60 years, between inpatients and outpatients and among patients in various wards. 39.4 % of supplementary products were purchased outside a regulated pharmacy environment. Potentially severe drug-supplement interactions were detected with 45.2 % of supplement users; however the majority of interactions were not included in one or the other of the three databases. In addition to that the risk ratings of the same interactions varied greatly between databases.
conclusionA significant number of patients are exposed to potential drug interactions with supplementary products; however interagreement among interaction databases is poor. Our data suggest that a full medication history should specifically address the intake of supplements.
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.