ArticleDrug, healthcare and patient safety2015
The effectiveness and limitations of regulatory warnings for the safe prescribing of citalopram.
Article in Drug, healthcare and patient safety, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Dear Doctor Letters regarding citalopram and escitalopram: guidelines vs real-world data.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2023Article
- [Effect of the direct healthcare professional communication on citalopram and escitalopram drug utilization for inpatient treatment of anxiety disorders].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2022Article
- Safer citalopram use in primary care: Can staff education and prescribing prompts improve adherence to national guidance? A closed loop clinical audit, service evaluation and quality improvement study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2022Article
- Real Patient and its Virtual Twin: Application of Quantitative Systems Toxicology Modelling in the Cardiac Safety Assessment of Citalopram.The AAPS journal · 2017Article
- Post-marketing safety signals: Challenges in regulatory decisions, communication & impact evaluation in developing countries.The Indian journal of medical research · 2017Article
- The safety of meperidine prescribing in older adults: A longitudinal population-based study.BMC geriatrics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCitalopram is the most commonly prescribed antidepressant in Canada. Concerns have been raised about its cardiac safety, and a dose-dependent prolongation of the QT interval has been documented. Drug interactions involving concomitant use of other medications that prolong the QT interval or increase citalopram levels by interfering with its metabolism increase the cardiac risk. Regulatory bodies (Health Canada and the US Food and Drug Administration) issued warnings and required labeling changes in 2011/2012, suggesting maximum citalopram doses (<40 mg for those <65 years; <20 mg for those ≥65 years) and avoiding drug interactions that increase cardiac risk. The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of these warnings on citalopram prescribing practices.
methodsA quasi-experimental interrupted time series analysis was conducted using all citalopram prescribing data from the population of Manitoba, Canada from 1999 to 2014. This allowed for the examination of high-dose prescribing (above regulatory warning levels) and the number of interacting medications per citalopram prescription.
resultsThere was a dramatic decline in the prescribing of high doses in both age groups, with a 64.8% decline in those <65 years and 33.6% in those ≥65 years. Segmented regression models indicated significant breakpoints in the third quarter of 2011 for both age groups (P<0.0001), corresponding to the time the regulatory warnings were issued. There appeared to be no impact of the warnings on the prescribing of interacting medications. The number of interacting medications actually increased in the postwarning period (<65, 0.78-0.81 interactions per citalopram prescription; ≥65, 0.93-0.94, P<0.001).
conclusionRegulatory changes appear to have produced an important reduction in the high-dose prescribing of citalopram. In contrast to this relatively simple dosage change, there was no indication that the more complex issue of resolving drug-drug interactions was impacted by regulatory warnings.
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.