Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of three brands of drug interaction software for use in intensive care units

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Pharmacy World & Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective To evaluate drug interaction software programs and determine their accuracy in identifying drug-drug interactions that may occur in intensive care units. Setting The study was developed in Brazil. Method Drug interaction software programs were identified through a bibliographic search in PUBMED and in LILACS (database related to the health sciences published in Latin American and Caribbean countries). The programs’ sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were determined to assess their accuracy in detecting drug–drug interactions. The accuracy of the software programs identified was determined using 100 clinically important interactions and 100 clinically unimportant ones. Stockley’s Drug Interactions 8th edition was employed as the gold standard in the identification of drug-drug interaction. Main outcome Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values. Results The programs studied were: Drug Interaction Checker (DIC), Drug-Reax (DR), and Lexi-Interact (LI). DR displayed the highest sensitivity (0.88) and DIC showed the lowest (0.69). A close similarity was observed among the programs regarding specificity (0.88–0.92) and positive predictive values (0.88–0.89). The DIC had the lowest negative predictive value (0.75) and DR the highest (0.91). Conclusion The DR and LI programs displayed appropriate sensitivity and specificity for identifying drug–drug interactions of interest in intensive care units. Drug interaction software programs help pharmacists and health care teams in the prevention and recognition of drug–drug interactions and optimize safety and quality of care delivered in intensive care units.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mouly S, Meune C, Bergmann JF. Mini-series: I. Basic science. Uncertainty and inaccuracy of predicting CYP-mediated in vivo drug interactions in the ICU from in vitro models: focus on CYP3A4. Intensive Care Med. 2009;35(3):417–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Spriet I, Meersseman W, de Hoon J, et al. Mini-series: II. Clinical aspects. Clinically relevant CYP450-mediated drug interactions in the ICU. Intensive Care Med. 2009;35(4):603–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Barrons R. Evaluation of personal digital assistant software for drug interactions. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2004;61(4):380–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Weideman RA, Bernstein IH, McKinney WP. Pharmacist recognition of potential drug interactions. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1999;56(15):1524–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Abarca J, Colon LR, Wang VS, Malone DC, Murphy JE. Armstrong E. Evaluation of the performance of drug–drug interaction screening software in community and hospital pharmacies. J Manag Care Pharm. 2006;12(5):383–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dallenbach MF, Bovier PA, Desmeules J. Detecting drug interactions using personal digital assistants in an out-patient clinic. QJM. 2007;100(11):691–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Clauson KA, Polen HH, Marsh WA. Clinical decision support tools: performance of personal digital assistant versus online drug information databases. Pharmacotherapy. 2007;27(12):1651–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Perkins NA, Murphy JE, Malone DC, Armstrong EP. Performance of drug–drug interaction software for personal digital assistants. Ann Pharmacother. 2006;40(5):850–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lam MV, McCart MG, Tsourounis C. An assessment of free, online drug–drug interaction screening programs (DSPs). Hosp Pharm. 2003;38(7):662–8.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Pham PA. Drug–drug interaction programs in clinical practice. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2008;83(3):396–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Vonbach P, Dubied A, Krähenbühl S, Beer JH. Evaluation of frequently used drug interaction screening programs. Pharm World Sci. 2008;30(4):367–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Baxter K (Ed). Stockley’s drug interactions. 8th ed. London: Pharmaceutical Press; 2008. ISBN 978-0-85369-755-8.

  13. Romac DR, Albertson TE. Drug interactions in the intensive care unit. Clin Chest Med. 1999;20(2):385–99.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mann HJ, Wittbrodt ET. Identifying drug usage patterns in the intensive care unit. Pharmacoeconomics. 1993;4(4):235–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mann HJ. Drug-associated disease: cytocrome P450 interactions. Crit Care Clin. 2006;22(2):329–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Biswal SP, Mishra S, Malhotra, Puri GD, Pandhi P. Drug utilization pattern in the intensive care unit of a tertiary care hospital. J.Clin.Pharmacol. 2006;46(8):945–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hammes JA, Pfuetzenreiter F, Silveira F, Koenig A, Westphal GA. Potential drug interactions prevalence in intensive care units. Rev Bras Terap Intensiva. 2008;20(4):349–54.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Bustamante GDD, Cabrera C, Duran GMG, Medina TJN. Detección de interacciones medicamentosas, em pacientes ingresados a la unidad de cuidados intensivos del Instituto Autônomo Hospital Universitário de los Andes. Vitae Academia Biomédica Digita. 2005;25(7):1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gordis L. Epidemiology. 2 ed. Philadelphia: W.B.Saunders Company; 2000. ISBN 0-7216-8338-X.

  20. Rodríguez-Terol A, Caraballo MO, Palma D, Santos-Ramos B, Molina T, Desongles T, Aguilar A. Quality of interaction database management systems. Farm Hosp. 2009;33(3):134–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Drug checker interaction. Medscape. Available from URL: http://www.medscape.com/druginfo/druginterchecker. Accessed Oct 29 2009.

  22. Drug Reax system. Micromedex 1. Thomson Reuters (Healthcare). Available from URL: https://www.thomsonhc.com. Accessed Oct 28 2009.

  23. Drugs.com. Drug interaction checker. Available from URL: http://www.drugs.com/drug_interactions.html. Accessed Oct 29 2009.

  24. Drugdigest. Check interaction. Available from URL: http://www.drugs.com. Acessed Oct 28 2009.

  25. Epocrates. Epocrates online. Available from URL: http://www.epocrates.com/. Accessed Oct 27 2009.

  26. Lexi-comp online. Lexi-interact. Available from URL: http://www.uptodate.com/crlsql/interact/frameset.jsp. Accessed Oct 26 2009.

  27. Ko Y, Abarca J, Malone DC, Dare DC, Geraets D, Houranieh A, Jones WN, Nichol WP, Schepers GP, Wilhardt M. Practitioners’ views on computerized drug-drug interaction alerts in the VA system. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007;14(1):56–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Paterno MD, Maviglia SM, Gorman PN, et al. Tiering drug–drug interaction alerts by severity increases compliance rates. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009;16(1):40–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Williams NT. Medication administration through enteral feeding tubes. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2008;65(24):2347–57.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Amariles P, Giraldo NA, Faus MJ. Interacciones medicamentosas : aproximación para estabelecer y evaluar su relevância clínica. Med Clin. 2007;129(1):27–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Rodríguez Terol A, Santos Ramos B, Caraballo Camacho M, Ollero Baturone M. Relevancia clínica de las interacciones medicamentosas. Med Clin. 2008;130(19):758–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The Brazilian Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel—CAPES funded this research.

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos 6627, Campus Pampulha, 31270-010, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil

    Adriano Max Moreira Reis

  2. Ribeirão Preto College of Nursing, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil

    Silvia Helena De Bortoli Cassiani

Authors
  1. Adriano Max Moreira Reis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Silvia Helena De Bortoli Cassiani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adriano Max Moreira Reis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Reis, A.M.M., Cassiani, S.H.D.B. Evaluation of three brands of drug interaction software for use in intensive care units. Pharm World Sci 32, 822–828 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-010-9445-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-010-9445-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation