ArticleIntegrated pharmacy research & practice2024
Drug Use Evaluation of Tenofovir/Lamivudine/Dolutegravir (TLD) Fixed-Dose Combination for Initiation and Transition Among HIV-Infected Individuals Attending Lumame Primary Hospital, North West Ethiopia.
Article in Integrated pharmacy research & practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Exploring Adherence, Treatment Experiences, and Quality of Healthcare Services in HIV Management Among Iraqi Patients: Challenges and Influential Factors.HIV/AIDS (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A key strategy for quality improvement is drug use evaluation, which looks at the safe, appropriate use of medication principles. Tenofovir/Lamivudine/Dolutegravir (TLD-FDC) usage has not yet been sufficiently examined in published literature. The purpose of this study was to assess how TLD were used by HIV-positive patients Using WHO drug use evaluation standards in Lumame Primary Hospital, North West Ethiopia. Methods: Using WHO drug use evaluation standards, a retrospective study design was used to evaluate the appropriateness of TLD use. Systematic random sampling was utilized to gather patient medical records containing TLD. Accordingly, 100 records that met the inclusion criteria were selected and reviewed between April 1 and 15, 2021. Five criteria, namely, indication, dose, contraindication, drug interaction, and TLD safety monitoring were used to evaluate the appropriateness of TLD utilization. Results: 80% of patients were transited to TLD from other regimens. The median time on TLD was found to be 13 months with 9 months to 18 months IQR. The latest CD4 count as well as CD4 count at the initiation or transition of TLD was not done for 75% and 89% of the patients, respectively. 3/4 (75%) of the patients were found to have a scheduled medication refill history. TLD dosing, indications, and contraindications were found to be 100% appropriate. No, TLD safety monitoring tests were done for 21% of the patients in this study. However, viral load, liver/kidney function, and serum creatinine tests were done for 77% (95% CI: 74%-79%), 5% (95% CI: 2%-8%), and 14% (95% CI: 11%-17%) of the patients, respectively. More over, In 93% (95% CI: 91%-95%) of the patients, the TLD interaction was appropriate; in 7%, it was not. All recording, documenting, and reporting technologies were available and used efficiently, except for the Electronic Dispensing Tool. Conclusion: Generally, good adherence to national and WHO guidelines was obtained regarding dose, indication, and contraindications. However, improvement in safety monitoring tests and CPT utilization is recommended. Drug interactions satisfied the majority of the criteria's threshold, while certain standards were not followed.
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.