Evaluation of resources for analyzing drug interactions

Authors

  • Risha I. Patel PharmD, PGY1 Community Pharmacy Resident, El Rio Community Health Center, University of Arizona College of Pharmacy, Tucson, AZ
  • Robert D. Beckett PharmD, BCPS, Director of the Drug Information Center and Assistant Professor of Pharmacy Practice; Manchester University College of Pharmacy, Natural, and Health Sciences, 10627 Diebold Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46845

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2016.142

Keywords:

Drug-Drug Interactions, Drug-Dietary Supplement Interactions, Pharmacy

Abstract

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.

Downloads

Additional Files

Published

2017-01-05

Issue

Vol. 104 No. 4 (2016): October 2016

Section

Surveys and Studies