Evaluation of resources for analyzing drug interactions.

OBJECTIVE: The research sought to evaluate seven drug information resources, specifically designed for analyzing drug interactions for scope, completeness, and ease of use, and determine the consistency of content among the seven resources. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted where 100 drug-drug and drug-dietary supplement interactions were analyzed using 7 drug information resources: Lexicomp Interactions module, Micromedex Drug Interactions, Clinical Pharmacology Drug Interaction Report, Facts & Comparisons eAnswers, Stockley's Drug Interactions (10th edition), Drug Interactions Analysis and Management (2014), and Drug Interaction Facts (2015). The interaction sample was developed based on published resources and peer input. Two independent reviewers gathered data for each interaction from each of the 7 resources using a common form. RESULTS: Eighty-two drug-drug and 18 drug-dietary supplement interactions were analyzed. Scope scores were higher for Lexicomp Interactions (97.0%), Clinical Pharmacology Drug Interaction Report (97.0%), and Micromedex Drug Interactions (93.0%) compared to all other resources (p<0.05 for each comparison). Overall completeness scores were higher for Micromedex Drug Interactions (median 5, interquartile range [IQR] 4 to 5) compared to all other resources (p<0.01 for each comparison) and were higher for Lexicomp Interactions (median 4, IQR 4 to 5), Facts & Comparisons eAnswers (median 4, IQR 4 to 5), and Drug Interaction Facts (4, IQR 4 to 5) compared to all other resources, except Micromedex (p<0.05 for each comparison). Ease of use, in terms of time to locate information and time to gather information, was similar among resources. Consistency score was higher for Micromedex (69.9%) compared to all other resources (p<0.05 for each comparison). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical Pharmacology Drug Interaction Report, Lexicomp Interactions, and Micromedex Drug Interactions scored highest in scope. Micromedex Drug Interactions and Lexicomp Interactions scored highest in completeness. Consistency scores were overall low, but Micromedex Drug Interactions was the highest.

Compliance with dosing recommendations from common references in prescribing antibiotics for preterm neonates.

PURPOSE: Incorrect dosage was the most common type of medication errors in neonate patients. Different dosing recommendations from common reference sources may have contributed to the errors. This study assesses the compliance rate with the common reference sources in antibiotic dosage prescribed for preterm infants in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). METHODS: A retrospective study using chart review was conducted at a tertiary care medical center with university affiliation in Taiwan. Study subjects were preterm neonates admitted to the NICU of the medical center between 2000 and 2002 and prescribed at least one antibiotic during the stay. Recommendations from three commonly used reference sources (Pediatric Dosage Handbook, Neonatal Drug Formulary, and Neofax) were employed to evaluate the dosage compliance of the antibiotic prescriptions. RESULTS: A total of 433 preterm infants and 3459 prescriptions were included. Depending on the reference source used, the percentages of antibiotic prescriptions where both the dose and the interval were compliant with recommendations ranged from 36.88 to 87.54%. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of antibiotics prescribed for preterm neonates in this medical center did not comply with the recommended dosage from common reference sources. Future studies should investigate the clinical impacts of the dosing deviation.

Developing a clinical teaching handbook and reference manual for part-time clinical faculty.

To orient nurses who are already clinical experts to their new role as clinical educators, we developed a department-specific handbook and a reference manual that included materials which could not, as a practical matter, be photocopied extensively. These materials allowed us to quickly orient new clinical instructors to the responsibilities and skills they would need for clinical instruction and supervision. Providing these orientation and training materials also helped solve the clinical nursing faculty shortage at our institution by supporting nurses who, despite expertise in clinical areas, lacked formal training or experience as educators.

Systematic comparison of four sources of drug information regarding adjustment of dose for renal function.

OBJECTIVE: To compare advice on dosage adjustment for renal impairment provided by four commonly used secondary pharmacotherapeutic sources. DESIGN: Systematic comparison of the definitions of renal impairment, recommendations for dosage adjustment, and the evidence in support of these recommendations in four information sources. DATA SOURCES: British National Formulary, Martindale: the Complete Drug Reference, American Hospital Formulary System Drug Information, and Drug Prescribing in Renal Failure. REVIEW METHODS: Two reviewers independently extracted data on recommendations for dosage adjustment for impaired renal function of 100 drugs often used in our hospital. RESULTS: The four sources differed in their recommendations for adjustments of dosage and dosing interval. They vary in their definitions of renal impairment; some are qualitative and remain unclear. All sources provide only a general description; the methods on which the advice is based and references for original data are rarely presented. CONCLUSIONS: The remarkable variation in definitions and recommendations, along with scarce details of the methods used to reach this advice, makes the available sources of drug information ill suited for clinical use. The methods used to retrieve information and use data should be described and made available to the reader. Advice on drug prescription, dose and dosing interval, contraindications, and adverse effects should be evidence based.

Development of a multilingual resource manual.

Providing culturally competent health care is a growing need as the population of culturally diverse women continues to rise. Compilation of a multilingual resource manual about maternal-child and women's health topics that can be used by health educators to provide care to non-English-speaking and limited English proficiency (LEP) clients was achieved to address this need. In this article, significant details of this process are described allowing the reader to produce a similar version of the manual.

The information sources used by community nurse prescribers.

A purposive sample of 22 community nurse prescribers and five prescribing leads were interviewed to determine how nurses both access and assess the reliability of pharmacological information. Prescribers used both printed material and other professionals to obtain pharmacological information. The most commonly mentioned sources of printed material were journals and the British National Formulary. Other people that nurses obtained information from included pharmaceutical company representatives, community pharmacists, nurse specialists, colleagues, and GPs. Nurses described the attributes that they associated with reliable information (previous vetting, up-to-date and used by other healthcare professionals) and unreliable information (produced by those with a vested interest). Much of the pharmacological information supporting prescribers is aimed at doctors and may not be accessible for nurse prescribers. Organizations seeking to influence evidence-based practice should consider the method of communication in addition to the message.

Usefulness of herbal and dietary supplement references.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the usefulness of some of the most common tertiary references that healthcare professionals employ to answer requests about herbal and dietary supplements. METHODS: All requests for information on herbal and dietary supplements received by the drug information service between April and September 2000 were evaluated. Each question was independently reviewed by 4 clinicians using a 4-point scale; 14 references were searched for appropriate answers. The percent of responses for each of the possible scores for each reference overall and by category of question was reported to determine the most helpful references for answering the broadest range of questions. RESULTS: Fifty questions regarding herbal and dietary supplements were analyzed. The electronic databases (Natural Medicine Comprehensive Database, Micromedex) and the Internet site (The Natural Pharmacist) were determined to be overall the most helpful references for providing information on herbal and dietary supplements. The Natural Therapeutics Pocket Guide was the most helpful book reference. CONCLUSIONS: These results will facilitate the retrieval of useful information on herbal and dietary supplements and enable healthcare professionals to determine appropriate allocation of resources as they build a drug information library for handling requests about these products.

Quality handbook in radiotherapy: personal experience.

The Quality Handbook includes the description of the activities carried out in Radiotherapy and the methodology used to ensure the Quality Assurance according to the principles indicated in national and international documents of reference and the recommendations of accreditation agencies. The structure of the Quality Handbook, the main aspects of single chapters, the selected quality indicators undergoing inspections are analysed and procedures to be followed for changes and updating of the Quality Handbook are described. The Quality Assurance program is illustrated in another article of this issue.

Quality handbook in radiotherapy. Brachytherapy: personal experience.

Brachytherapy is a conventional method of radiation therapy characterized by peculiar technical, clinical, operational and radioprotection problems. Therefore, the management of a service or department of brachytherapy requires a specific organization aimed at Quality Assurance. In this report, the personal experience with the drawing up of a Quality Handbook of brachytherapy with reference to the method used and the structure of the document, is described.

Practical aspects in drawing up a quality handbook in radiotherapy.

The quality and dimensions of the Quality Handbook in healthcare are shortly defined. Particular emphasis is put on the role of the quality of compliance and on certification (ISO 9000). The role of quality assessment in healthcare processes is described. It is not conceived as an inspection but rather as an incentive to a continuous quality improvement in healthcare processes. Within the quality of compliance, the role of the Quality Handbook and its modalities of definition, organization and implementation are illustrated.

Incorrect overdose management advice in the Physicians' Desk Reference.

STUDY HYPOTHESIS: Physicians may consult references such as Physicians' Desk Reference (PDR) for overdose management advice. Although PDR recommendations are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), we hypothesized that they are often outdated and potentially hazardous. METHODS: We surveyed physicians who consulted our poison center during a 1-month period with regard to their use of the PDR for overdose information and also compared PDR overdose treatment recommendations with those of five current major toxicology references. For the PDR overdose information review we examined data from the American Association of Poison Control Centers to identify pharmaceutical categories with the largest number of deaths. We reviewed the four leading drugs with at least 1,000 reported exposures in each category and identified 20 PDR-listed brand-name products for analysis. We obtained the consensus from five current toxicology references on contraindicated treatments, ineffective treatments, and specific recommended treatments or antidotes. Finally, we compared the overdose management advice provided in the 1994 PDR with the toxicology reference consensus. RESULTS: Forty of 80 of physicians surveyed (50%) reported use of the PDR for overdose information in the preceding 12 months. Of the 20 PDR entries, 16 (80%) had at least one deficiency, and 5 (25%) had two or more deficiencies. Thirteen (65%) omitted an indicated specific treatment, three (15%) recommended contraindicated treatments, and four (20%) advised ineffective treatments with potential for harm. Only four entries (20%) had no deficiencies by our survey criteria. CONCLUSION: We found serious discrepancies in overdose treatment advice in the PDR compared with a consensus of current toxicology references. Altogether, four of five PDR entries were deficient, and almost half advised ineffective or frankly contraindicated therapies. Despite FDA approval, the use of PDR overdose advice in a serious poisoning case could result in unnecessary morbidity or mortality.