Clarity and applicability of drug-drug interaction management guidelines: A systematic appraisal by general practitioners and community pharmacists in the netherlands

Drug Safety

Volumn 34, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 683-690

  Floor Schreudering, Annemieke ^a   De Smet, Peter A G M ^b,c   Buurma, Henk ^a   Amini, Sonia ^a   Bouvy, Marcel L ^a,d  

^a SIR Institute for Pharmacy Practice and Policy   (Netherlands)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c Scientific Institute of Dutch Pharmacists (WINAp)   (Netherlands)

^d UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Drug interactions; Guideline utilisation; Medication errors; Prescribing

Indexed keywords

ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT; ATORVASTATIN; BETA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT; CALCIUM CHANNEL BLOCKING AGENT; CORTICOSTEROID; COUMARIN; DILTIAZEM; DIPEPTIDYL CARBOXYPEPTIDASE INHIBITOR; DIURETIC AGENT; IRON; LEVOTHYROXINE; METHOTREXATE; NONSTEROID ANTIINFLAMMATORY AGENT; PARACETAMOL; SALICYLIC ACID; SEROTONIN UPTAKE INHIBITOR; SIMVASTATIN; VERAPAMIL;

APPRAISAL OF GUIDELINES FOR RESEARCH AND EVALUATION; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG DRUG INTERACTION; DRUG INTERACTION; DRUG SUBSTITUTION; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; NETHERLANDS; PHARMACIST; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; SCORING SYSTEM; VALIDATION STUDY;

ADVERSE DRUG REACTION REPORTING SYSTEMS; COMMUNITY PHARMACY SERVICES; DRUG INTERACTIONS; GENERAL PRACTITIONERS; HUMANS; NETHERLANDS; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS; PHARMACISTS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; QUALITY CONTROL;

EID: 79960367932     PISSN: 01145916     EISSN: 11791942     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/11587270-000000000-00000     Document Type: Review

References (38)

1. Juurlink DN, Mamdani M, Kopp A, et al. Drug-drug interactions among elderly patients hospitalized for drug toxicity. JAMA 2003 Apr 2; 289 (13): 1652-8 (Pubitemid 37430270)
2. Malone DC, Abarca J, Skrepnek GH, et al. Pharmacist workload and pharmacy characteristics associated with the dispensing of potentially clinically important drug-drug interactions. Med Care 2007 May; 45 (5): 456-62
3. Merlo J, Liedholm H, Lindblad U, et al. Prescriptions with potential drug interactions dispensed at Swedish pharmacies in January 1999: cross sectional study. BMJ 2001 Aug 25; 323 (7310): 427-8 (Pubitemid 32801396)
4. Buurma H, De Smet P, Egberts A. Clinical risk management in Dutch community pharmacies: the case of drug-drug interactions. Drug Saf 2006; 29 (8): 723-32 (Pubitemid 44175043)
5. Van der Sijs H, Aarts J, Vulto A, et al. Overriding of drug safety alerts in computerized physician order entry. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006 Mar-Apr; 13 (2): 138-47 (Pubitemid 43332904)
6. Weingart SN, TothM, Sands DZ, et al. Physicians decisions to override computerized drug alerts in primary care. Arch Intern Med 2003 Nov 24; 163 (21): 2625-31 (Pubitemid 37464421)
7. Murphy JE, Forrey RA, Desiraju U. Community pharmacists responses to drug-drug interaction alerts.AmJHealth Syst Pharm 2004 Jul 15; 61 (14): 1484-7 (Pubitemid 39481422)
8. Buurma H, de Smet P, van den Hoff O, et al. Nature, frequency and determinants of prescription modifications in Dutch community pharmacies. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2001 Jul; 52 (1): 85-91 (Pubitemid 32862773)
9. Abarca J, Colon LR, Wang VS, et al. Evaluation of the performance of drug-drug interaction screening software in community and hospital pharmacies. JManag Care Pharm 2006 Jun; 12 (5): 383-9 (Pubitemid 47400595)
10. Becker M, Kallewaard M, Caspers P, et al. Potential determinants of drug-drug interaction associated dispensing in community pharmacies. Drug Saf 2005; 28 (5): 371-8 (Pubitemid 40733724)
11. Gaikwad R, Sketris I, Shepherd M, et al. Evaluation of accuracy of drug interaction alerts triggered by two electronic medical record systems in primary healthcare. Health Informatics J 2007 Sep; 13 (3): 163-77 (Pubitemid 47308346)
12. Indermitte J, Erba L, Beutler M, et al. Management of potential drug interactions in community pharmacies: a questionnaire-based survey in Switzerland. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2007 Mar; 63 (3): 297-305 (Pubitemid 46233158)
13. Bergk V, Gasse C, Schnell R, et al. Requirements for a successful implementation of drug interaction information systems in general practice: results of a questionnaire survey in Germany. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2004 Oct; 60 (8): 595-602 (Pubitemid 39517914)
14. Hansten PD. Drug interaction management. Pharm World Sci 2003 Jun; 25 (3): 94-7 (Pubitemid 36749799)
15. Van Roon EN, Flikweert S, le Comte M, et al. Clinical relevance of drug-drug interactions: a structured assessment procedure. Drug Saf 2005; 28 (12): 1131-9 (Pubitemid 41776003)
16. Grol R, Dalhuijsen J, Thomas S, et al. Attributes of clinical guidelines that influence use of guidelines in general practice: observational study. BMJ 1998 Sep 26; 317 (7162): 858-61 (Pubitemid 28434555)
17. Grol R, Grimshaw J. From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients care. Lancet 2003 Oct 11; 362 (9391): 1225-30 (Pubitemid 37255352)
18. Burgers JS, Grol RP, Zaat JO, et al. Characteristics of effective clinical guidelines for general practice. Br J Gen Pract 2003 Jan; 53 (486): 15-9 (Pubitemid 36040598)
19. Buurma H, Schalekamp T, Egberts AC, et al. Compliance with national guidelines for the management of drug-drug interactions in Dutch community pharmacies. Ann Pharmacother 2007 Dec; 41 (12): 2024-31 (Pubitemid 350230572)
20. The AGREE Collaboration. Development and validation of an international appraisal instrument for assessing the quality of clinical practice guidelines: the AGREE project. Qual Saf Health Care 2003 Feb; 12 (1): 18-23
21. MacDermid JC, Brooks D, Solway S, et al. Reliability and validity of the AGREE instrument used by physical therapists in assessment of clinical practice guidelines. BMC Health Serv Res 2005 Mar 2; 5 (1): 18
22. Gorman SK, ChungMH, SlavikRS, et al.A critical appraisal of the quality of critical care pharmacotherapy clinical practice guidelines and their strength of recommendations. Intensive Care Med 2010 Oct; 36 (10): 1798-801
23. Burgers JS, Fervers B, Haugh M, et al. International assessment of the quality of clinical practice guidelines in oncology using the Appraisal of Guidelines and Research and Evaluation Instrument. J ClinOncol 2004 May 15; 22 (10): 2000-7 (Pubitemid 41095193)
24. Wilting I, Egberts AC, Heerdink ER, et al. Evaluation of available treatment guidelines for themanagement of lithium intoxication. Ther Drug Monit 2009 Apr; 31 (2): 247-60
25. Kinnunen-Amoroso M, Pasternack I, Mattila S, et al. Evaluation of the practice guidelines of Finnish Institute of Occupational Health with AGREE instrument. Ind Health 2009 Dec; 47 (6): 689-93
26. McNair RP, Hegarty K. Guidelines for the primary care of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people: a systematic review. Ann Fam Med 2010 Nov-Dec; 8 (6): 533-41
27. Faggion Jr. CM. Clinician assessment of guidelines that support common dental procedures. J Evid Based Dent Pract 2008 Mar; 8 (1): 1-7
28. Van Diermen DE, Aartman IH, Baart JA, et al. Dental management of patients using antithrombotic drugs: critical appraisal of existing guidelines. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009 May; 107 (5): 616-24
29. Potting C, Mistiaen P, Poot E, et al. A review of quality assessment of the methodology used in guidelines and systematic reviews on oral mucositis. J Clin Nurs 2009 Jan; 18 (1): 3-12
30. Dutch Association for the Advancement of Pharmacy. The G-standard: structure, safety assessment and decision support [online]. Available from URL: http://www.knmp. nl/vakinhoud/farmacotherapie/g-standaard/the-g-standaardthe- medicines-standard-in-healthcare [Accessed 2008 Dec 10]
31. Medication surveillance commentaries 2008-2009 [in Dutch]. Houten: Health Base Foundation, 2008
32. Guyatt GH, OxmanAD, Vist GE, et al.GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008 Apr 26; 336 (7650): 924-6 (Pubitemid 351632017)
33. Guyatt GH, Cook DJ, Jaeschke R, et al. Grades of recommendation for antithrombotic agents: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th ed.). Chest 2008 Jun; 133 (6 Suppl.): 123-31S
34. Nuckols TK, Lim YW, Wynn BO, et al. Rigorous development does not ensure that guidelines are acceptable to a panel of knowledgeable providers. J Gen Intern Med 2008 Jan; 23 (1): 37-44
35. Ray-Coquard I, Philip T, de Laroche G, et al. A controlled before-after study: impact of a clinical guidelines programme and regional cancer network organization on medical practice. Br J Cancer 2002 Feb 1; 86 (3): 313-21 (Pubitemid 34185109)
36. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979 Mar; 86 (2): 420-8
37. Burgers JS. Guideline quality and guideline content: are they related? Clin Chem 2006 Jan; 52 (1): 3-4 (Pubitemid 43032460)
38. Watine J, Friedberg B, Nagy E, et al. Conflict between guideline methodologic quality and recommendation validity: a potential problem for practitioners. Clin Chem 2006 Jan; 52 (1): 65-72 (Pubitemid 43032468)