A systematic review of the use of dosage form manipulation to obtain required doses to inform use of manipulation in paediatric practice.

This study sought to determine whether there is an evidence base for drug manipulation to obtain the required dose, a common feature of paediatric clinical practice. A systematic review of the data sources, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, IPA and the Cochrane database of systematic reviews, was used. Studies that considered the dose accuracy of manipulated medicines of any dosage form, evidence of safety or harm, bioavailability, patient experience, tolerability, contamination and comparison of methods of manipulation were included. Case studies and letters were excluded. Fifty studies were eligible for inclusion, 49 of which involved tablets being cut, split, crushed or dispersed. The remaining one study involved the manipulation of suppositories of one drug. No eligible studies concerning manipulation of oral capsules or liquids, rectal enemas, nebuliser solutions, injections or transdermal patches were identified. Twenty four of the tablet studies considered dose accuracy using weight and/or drug content. In studies that considered weight using adapted pharmacopoeial specifications, the percentage of halved tablets meeting these specifications ranged from 30% to 100%. Eighteen studies investigated bioavailability, pharmacokinetics or clinical outcomes following manipulations which included nine delayed or modified release formulations. In each of these nine studies the entirety of the dosage form was administered. Only one of the 18 studies was identified where drugs were manipulated to obtain a proportion of the dosage form, and that proportion administered. The five studies that considered patient perception found that having to manipulate the tablets did not have a negative impact on adherence. Of the 49 studies only two studies reported investigating children. This review yielded limited evidence to support manipulation of medicines for children. The results cannot be extrapolated between dosage forms, methods of manipulation or between different brands of the same drug.

Why are Excipients Important to Neonates?

Neonates are given many medicines. A significant proportion of these medicines contain excipients. Excipients are used to facilitate the manufacture and use of medicines. Without excipients, it would not be feasible to formulate some drugs into appropriate medicinal products. For others the removal of excipients would reduce the shelf life and make them uneconomic to produce or too expensive for users to purchase. Excipients are also important because some of them can cause harm. Accordingly, it is important to minimize excipient exposure when possible and to only use them when there is a clear pharmaceutical requirement. On balance it is generally safe to use medicines containing excipients. This review introduces physicians and nurses to the functions of excipients in medicines and describes some potential adverse effects of excipients in neonates. The review also provides pharmaceutical scientists with an insight to issues that arise when excipients are administered to neonates. The review answers some key questions about excipients, addresses some case studies of excipient use, proposes approaches for clinicians who prescribe and administer medicines containing excipients and identifies areas for research that seeks to establish the safety profiles of excipients in neonates."

Manipulation of drugs to achieve the required dose is intrinsic to paediatric practice but is not supported by guidelines or evidence.

BACKGROUND: A lack of age-appropriate formulations can make it difficult to administer medicines to children. A manipulation of the dosage form may be required to achieve the required dose. This study aimed to describe medicines that are manipulated to achieve the required dose in paediatric practice. METHOD: A structured, undisguised observational study and postal survey. The observational study investigated drug manipulations occurring in clinical practice across three sites. The questionnaire, administered to a sample of paediatric nurses throughout the UK, surveyed manipulations conducted and nurses' experiences and views. RESULTS: The observational study identified 310 manipulations, of which 62% involved tablets, 21% were intravenous drugs and 10% were sachets. Of the 54 observed manipulations 40 involved tablets with 65% of the tablets being cut and 30% dispersed to obtain a smaller dose. 188 manipulations were reported by questionnaire respondents, of these 46% involved tablets, 12% were intravenous drugs, and 12% were nebuliser solutions. Manipulations were predominantly, but not exclusively, identified in specialist clinical areas with more highly dependent patients. Questionnaire respondents were concerned about the accuracy of the dose achieved following manipulations and the lack of practice guidance. CONCLUSION: Manipulations to achieve the required dose occur throughout paediatric in-patient settings. The impact of manipulations on the efficacy of the drugs, the accuracy of the dose and any adverse effects on patients is not known. There is a need to develop evidence-based guidance for manipulations of medicines in children.

Hospitalised neonates in Estonia commonly receive potentially harmful excipients.

BACKGROUND: Information on the neonatal exposure to excipients is limited. Our aim was to describe the extent of excipient intake by Estonian neonates; to classify the excipients according to potential neonatal toxicity and thereby to measure the extent of exposure of neonates to potentially harmful excipients. METHODS: A prospective cohort study that recorded all medicines prescribed to patients aged below 28 days admitted to Tartu University Hospital from 01.02-01.08 2008 and to Tallinn Children's Hospital from 01.02- 01.08 2009 was conducted. Excipients were identified from Summaries of Product Characteristics and classified according to toxicity following a literature review. RESULTS: 1961 prescriptions comprising 107 medicines were written for 348/490 neonates admitted. A total of 123 excipients were found in 1620 (83%) prescriptions and 93 (87%) medicines. 47 (38%) of these excipients were classified as potentially or known to be harmful to neonates. Most neonates (97%) received at least one medicine (median number 2) with potentially or known to be harmful excipient. Parabens were the most commonly used known to be harmful excipients and sodium metabisulphite the most commonly used potentially harmful excipient, received by 343 (99%) and 297 (85%) of treated neonates, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalised neonates in Estonia are commonly receiving a wide range of excipients with their medication. Quantitative information about excipients should be made available to pharmacists and neonatologists helping them to take into account excipient issues when selecting medicines and to monitor for adverse effects if administration of medicines containing excipients is unavoidable.

The manipulation of drugs to obtain the required dose: systematic review.

AIM: To describe the development of a systematic review protocol that maps the evidence relating to drug manipulations conducted to obtain the required dose. This process included defining a search strategy and methods to assess the quality and to synthesize the evidence retrieved. BACKGROUND: Economic constraints mean that marketed formulations may not meet the needs of all patients. Consequently, it is sometimes necessary to manipulate marketed products with the aim of obtaining the required dose. Most clinical practice appears to be guided by ad hoc approaches and informal literature reviews. METHODS: This systematic review protocol has been designed to identify the evidence available on drug manipulation. The review aims to identify what evidence is available and where the gaps appear in the current evidence. This report describes the challenges of developing a systematic review in an area that potentially involves many drugs and considers outcomes other than effectiveness. In particular, searches required the use of non-specific terms and the iterative development of a complex search strategy. The development of quality assessment criteria is also described. Funding commenced in April 2009. DISCUSSION: The systematic review described here will capture a broad selection of research about drug manipulations and may also be of interest to those conducting reviews in broad remit subject areas that are not easy to define using accepted terminology.

Needle-free and microneedle drug delivery in children: a case for disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

Parenteral routes of drug administration have poor acceptability and tolerability in children. Advances in transdermal drug delivery provide a potential alternative for improving drug administration in this patient group. Issues with parenteral delivery in children are highlighted and thus illustrate the scope for the application of needle-free and microneedle technologies. This mini-review discusses the opportunities and challenges for providing disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) currently prescribed to paediatric rheumatology patients using such technologies. The aim is to raise further awareness of the need for age-appropriate formulations and drug delivery systems and stimulate exploration of these options for DMARDs, and in particular, rapidly emerging biologics on the market. The ability of needle-free and microneedle technologies to deliver monoclonal antibodies and fusion proteins still remains largely untested. Such an understanding is crucial for future drug design opportunities. The bioavailability, safety and tolerance of delivering biologics into the viable epidermis also need to be studied.

Inappropriate oral formulations and information in paediatric trials.

Previously, quality of formulations information provided for oral medications used in paediatric clinical trials published in 10 highly cited journals between 2002 and 2004 raised concerns. This short report explores if there was any subsequent improvement on how the formulations used in trials involving children <12 years reported in the same journals. Studies published between 2004 and 2008 were hand-searched and classified as containing adequate, some or no formulation information. Those involving solid dosage forms were further analysed. Only 31% (44/140) of publications provided adequate information, 5% less compared to 2002-2004 (28/76). There was a significant 12% rise (p<0.05) of no formulation information at all (37/140) and in tablets/capsules use (53/140), of which 3/4 gave no administration details, even for those under 6 years old, but a 12% decline in suitable paediatric formulations use (52/140 compared to 37/76). Contrary to expectations, overall quality of formulation information reported markedly deteriorated, jeopardising validity of clinical outcomes. The situation may reflect continued lack of awareness among investigators and other stakeholders of the importance of using suitable age-appropriate formulations.