Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31098917›Full record

SynthesisDrug safety2019

Evaluation of Potential Drug-Drug Interactions in Adults in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Mary Grace Fitzmaurice, Adrian Wong, Hannah Akerberg, Simona Avramovska, Pamela L Smithburger, Mitchell S Buckley, Sandra L Kane-Gill

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Drug safety, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Effect of electronic drug-drug interaction alerts on patient and clinician outcomes: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. [Drug-drug interactions in critically ill patients].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. An update on drug-drug interactions for care of the acutely ill in the era of COVID-19.American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Mary Grace FitzmauriceDepartment of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, University of Pittsburgh, 303 Baum, 4B- 4, 5607, Baum Boulevard, Pittsburgh, PA, 15206, USA.
Adrian WongDepartment of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, University of Pittsburgh, 303 Baum, 4B- 4, 5607, Baum Boulevard, Pittsburgh, PA, 15206, USA.
Hannah AkerbergDepartment of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, University of Pittsburgh, 303 Baum, 4B- 4, 5607, Baum Boulevard, Pittsburgh, PA, 15206, USA.
Simona AvramovskaDepartment of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, University of Pittsburgh, 303 Baum, 4B- 4, 5607, Baum Boulevard, Pittsburgh, PA, 15206, USA.
Pamela L SmithburgerDepartment of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, University of Pittsburgh, 303 Baum, 4B- 4, 5607, Baum Boulevard, Pittsburgh, PA, 15206, USA.
Mitchell S BuckleyDepartment of Pharmacy, Banner-University Medical Center Phoenix, 1111 E. McDowell Road, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Sandra L Kane-GillDepartment of Pharmacy, UPMC Presbyterian, 200 Lothrop Street, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. kane-gill@pitt.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7523-4846
University of Pittsburgh · USBanner - University Medical Center Phoenix · USMassachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences · USUPMC Presbyterian · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere is an increased risk of potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) in critically ill patients based on the number of drugs received. The occurrence of pDDIs and clinical significance is not well described.

objectiveThe aim was to provide insight into important clinical issues and offer guidance on drug-drug interaction (DDI) surveillance through the performance of a systematic review.

methodsFive targeted objectives were developed, a priori, which guided study selection and data abstraction. Two independent reviewers extracted the definition, frequency, type, and clinical significance of pDDIs. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the proportion of patients exposed to a pDDI. Three data sources (PubMed, Embase, and Scopus) were utilized for the search to include studies that evaluated pDDIs in adult critically ill patients. Included studies in the systematic review and meta-analysis were required to be full text.

resultsA total of 39 studies met inclusion criteria. Definitions of pDDIs were diverse. Frequency of pDDIs varied by study, but was most commonly between one and five pDDIs per patient. Fifty-eight percent of patients were exposed to at least one pDDI during their intensive care unit admission. Types of pDDIs identified were numerous, with aspirin being the most common drug involved. As expected, not all pDDIs were clinically significant. Clinical significance was determined by varied definitions and sources.

conclusionsImproving the understanding of clinically significant pDDIs and alerts that clinicians encounter may guide better development of surveillance through clinical decision support and decrease alert fatigue.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalDrug InteractionsIntensive Care UnitsAdultAspirinHumansAspirin

Identifiers

PMID31098917
OpenAlexW2946454496

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.