Acil Servis Kırmızı Alanda İlaç-İlaç Etkileşimleri: Retrospektif Bir Çalışma

Year 2024, Issue: Early Access

Ş. Efsun Antmen , Canan Çulha , Mesut Sancar , Sema Erden Ertürk , Necmiye Canacankatan , Mehmet Canacankatan

https://doi.org/10.18678/dtfd.1530688

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, acil servislere başvuran yetişkin hastalarda ilaç-ilaç etkileşimi potansiyelini değerlendirmektir.
Gereç ve Yöntemler: Bu kesitsel çalışmaya, acil servisin kırmızı bölgesine kabul edilen, muayene edilen, tedavi edilen ve birden fazla ilaç alan 410 hasta dahil edilmiştir. İlaç-ilaç etkileşimi analizi LexiInteract yazılımı kullanılarak gerçekleştirilmiştir.
Bulgular: Hastaların ortanca yaşı 63 (aralık, 19-96) yıl olup %55,4'ü (n=227) kadın ve %44,5’i (n=183) erkektir. Hastalar arasında toplam 1.230 ilaç tespit edilmiştir. 181 (%44,1) hastada 330 adet olası ilaç-ilaç etkileşimi tespit edilmiştir. Erkek ve kadın hastalar arasında ilaç-ilaç etkileşimi oranları bakımından anlamlı bir fark bulunmazken (p=0,658), 65 yaş ve üzeri hastalarda (p=0,048) ve çoklu ilaç kullanımı olan hastalarda (p<0,001) bu oran daha yüksekti. Ayrıca, serebrovasküler hastalık (p=0,038) ve travma (p=0,002) ile başvuran hastalarda da etkileşim oranları daha yüksek idi. Lexicomp© ilaç bilgi sistemine göre, olası ilaç-ilaç etkileşimleri risk kategorisi C (n=299, %72,9), risk kategorisi D (n=22, %5,4) ve risk kategorisi X (n=9, %2,2) olarak sınıflandırıldı. En sık etkileşime giren ilaç çiftleri, C kategorisinde Furosemid-Salbutamol, D kategorisinde Enoksaparin-Asetilsalisilik asit ve X kategorisinde Deksketoprofen-Asetilsalisilik asit idi.
Sonuç: Acil servisin kırmızı bölgesinde tedavi edilen hastaların neredeyse yarısı ilaç etkileşimi riski altındaydı. Acil servis hasta bakımının kritik alanlarında tıbbi talimatlara başlamadan önce ilaç-ilaç etkileşimi riskinin değerlendirilmesi esastır ve potansiyel yan etkilerle ilgili olarak takip düzenlenmelidir.

Keywords

İlaç etkileşimi, acil servis, kırmızı bölge, klinik eczacı

Drug-Drug Interactions in the Red Zone of the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Study

Abstract

Aim: This study aimed to assess the potential for drug-drug interactions in adult patients admitted to the emergency departments.
Material and Methods: This cross-sectional study included 410 patients who were admitted to the red zone of the emergency departments, examined, treated, and received multiple medications. Drug-drug interaction analysis was conducted using LexiInteract software.
Results: The median age of patients was 63 (range, 19-96) years, with 55.4% (n=227) being female and 44.6% (n=183) were male. A total of 1,230 medications were identified among the patients. In 181 (44.1%) patients, 330 possible drug-drug interactions were detected. While there was no significant difference in the rate of drug-drug interactions between male and female patients (p=0.658), this rate was higher in patients aged 65 years and over (p=0.048) and patients with polypharmacy (p<0.001). Also, the interaction rates were higher in patients admitted with cerebrovascular disease (p=0.038) and trauma (p=0.002). According to the Lexicomp© drug information system, potential drug-drug interactions were classified into risk category C (n=299, 72.9%), risk category D (n=22, 5.4%), and risk category X (n=9, 2.2%). The most frequently interacting drug pairs were Furosemide-Salbutamol in category C, Enoxaparin-Acetylsalicylic acid in category D, and Dexketoprofen-Acetylsalicylic acid in category X.
Conclusion: Nearly half of the patients treated in the red zone of the emergency department were at risk of drug interactions. Assessing the risk of drug-drug interactions is essential before initiating medical instructions in critical areas of emergency department patient care, and follow-up should be organized about potential adverse effects.

Keywords

Drug interaction, emergency service, red zone, clinical pharmacist

References

• Aronson JK. Medication errors: definitions and classification. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2009;67(6):599-604.
• Moura CS, Acurcio FA, Belo NO. Drug-drug interactions associated with length of stay and cost of hospitalization. J Pharm Pharm Sci. 2009;12(3):266-72.
• Gentile S, Vignally P, Durand AC, Gainotti S, Sambuc R, Gerbeaux P. Nonurgent patients in the emergency department? A French formula to prevent misuse. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010;10:66.
• Okuno MFP, Cintra RS, Vancini-Campanharo CR, Batista REA. Drug interaction in the emergency service. Einstein (São Paulo). 2013;11(4):462-6.
• Zhao M, Liu CF, Feng YF, Chen H. Potential drug-drug interactions in drug therapy for older adults with chronic coronary syndrome at hospital discharge: A real-world study. Front Pharmacol. 2022;13:946415.
• Becker ML, Kallewaard M, Caspers PW, Visser LE, Leufkens HG, Stricker BH Hospitalisations and emergency department visits due to drug-drug interactions: a literature review. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2007;16(6):641-51.
• Limandri BJ. Adverse events, drug interactions, and treatment adherence. J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv. 2020;58(2):9-13.
• Thomsen LA, Winterstein AG, Søndergaard B, Haugbølle LS, Melander A. Systematic review of the incidence and characteristics of preventable adverse drug events in ambulatory care. Ann Pharmacother. 2007;41(9):1411-26.
• Gülçebi İdriz Oğlu M, Küçükibrahimoğlu E, Karaalp A, Sarikaya Ö, Demirkapu M, Onat F, et al. Potential drug-drug interactions in a medical intensive care unit of a university hospital. Turk J Med Sci. 2016;46(3):812-9.
• Cakmak F, Ikizceli I, Ozturk D, Altinbilek E, Karakus Yilmaz B, Biberoglu S, et al. Emergency department length of stay for critically ill patients followed up in red zone. Signa Vitae. 2021;17(1):63-8.
• Malki MA, Pearson ER. Drug-drug-gene interactions and adverse drug reactions. Pharmacogenomics J. 2020;20(3):355-66.
• Davies EA, O'Mahony MS. Adverse drug reactions in special populations - the elderly. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2015;80(4):796-807.
• Rohail MU, Khan A, Pflaum RM, Patel M, Moody MA. An atypical case of neuroleptic malignant syndrome associated with ciprofloxacin and quetiapine. Cureus. 2023;15(3):e36178.
• Hovstadius B, Petersson G. Factors leading to excessive polypharmacy. Clin Geriatr Med. 2012;28(2):159-72.
• Dookeeram D, Bidaisee S, Paul JF, Nunes P, Robertson P, Maharaj VR, et al. Polypharmacy and potential drug-drug interactions in emergency department patients in the Caribbean. Int J Clin Pharm. 2017;39(5):1119-27.
• Clauson KA, Marsh WA, Polen HH, Seamon MJ, Ortiz BI. Clinical decision support tools: analysis of online drug information databases. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2007;7:7.
• Kheshti R, Aalipour M, Namazi S. A comparison of five common drug-drug interaction software programs regarding accuracy and comprehensiveness. J Res Pharm Pract. 2016;5(4):257-63.
• Babushkina EA, Belokopytova LV, Grachev AM, Meko DM, Vaganov EA. Variation of the hydrological regime of Bele-Shira closed basin in Southern Siberia and its reflection in the radial growth of Larix sibirica. Reg Environ Change. 2017;17(6):1725-37.
• Dagdelen MS, Gulen D, Ceylan I, Girgin NK. Evaluation of potential drug-drug interactions in intensive care unit. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2021;25(18):5801-6.
• Ramsdale E, Mohamed M, Yu V, Otto E, Juba K, Awad H, et al. Polypharmacy, potentially inappropriate medications, and drug-drug interactions in vulnerable older adults with advanced cancer initiating cancer treatment. Oncologist. 2022;27(7):e580-8.
• Zhao M, Liu CF, Feng YF, Chen H. Potential drug-drug interactions in drug therapy for older adults with chronic coronary syndrome at hospital discharge: A real-world study. Front Pharmacol. 2022;13:946415.