Advertisement

Clinical Drug Investigation

, Volume 31, Issue 5, pp 309–316 | Cite as

Potential Drug-Drug Interactions Associated with Prolonged Stays in the Intensive Care Unit

A Retrospective Cohort Study
  • Cristiano MouraEmail author
  • Nília Prado
  • Francisco Acurcio
Original Research Article

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) are one cause of adverse drug events and can cause harm to hospitalized patients. Little has been done to study the relationship between potential DDIs and an increased length of stay (LOS) in the intensive care unit (ICU). The aim of this study was to determine the frequency of potential DDIs during ICU stays and to determine whether the frequency of these adverse events was associated with ICU LOS.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted from January to December 2007 in the ICU of the General Hospital of Vitória da Conquista, Brazil. The study population comprised all patients aged >18 years admitted to the hospital’s ICU. Demographic and prescription data were collected from medical files. All prescriptions administered during the period were examined. Potential DDIs were identified and classified according to the book Drug Interaction Facts. The median LOS was determined by the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models were fitted to analyse the relationship between potential DDIs and the LOS.

Results: The study population comprised 236 adults, 158 (67%) of them men, between the ages of 18 and 96 years, with a mean ± SD age of 50 ± 20 years. The median LOS among patients with at least one DDI was 12 days compared with 5 days among those with no DDIs (p<0.01). Multiple Cox proportional regression analyses showed that a prolonged ICU stay was positively associated with DDIs (hazard ratio [HR] 0.54; 95% CI 0.37, 0.80; p<0.01), where an HR <1 indicates a variable that increases the risk of prolonged stay (i.e. an adverse outcome). This association was true even after controlling for the cost of hospitalization, the number of procedures and the number of prescribed drugs.

Conclusion: In this study, DDIs were found to be associated with a longer ICU stay. Given that LOS is an important indicator of the quality of health care delivered and that DDIs are considered avoidable, specific measures are necessary to increase the recognition of DDIs. E-prescriptions and dispensing programmes associated with a DDI knowledge base can help health professionals identify hazardous drug combinations.

Keywords

Intensive Care Unit Intensive Care Unit Admission Intensive Care Unit Stay Charlson Comorbidity Index Intensive Care Unit Discharge 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was financed by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) and by the Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado da Bahia (FAPESB). The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this study. The authors thank undergraduate students Ludmila Tavares, Jessica Bomfim, Luana Costa and Priscila Guimarães for their participation in collecting data and digitalizing the knowledge base.

References

  1. 1.
    Ernst FR, Grizzle AJ. Drug-related morbidity and mortality: updating the cost-of-illness model. J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash) 2001 Mar–Apr; 41(2): 192–9Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Classen DC, Pestotnik SL, Evans RS, et al. Adverse drug events in hospitalized patients: excess length of stay, extra costs, and attributable mortality. JAMA 1997 Jan 22–29; 277(4): 301–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jankel CA, Speedie SM. Detecting drug interactions: a review of the literature. DICP 1990 Oct; 24(10): 982–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Heininger-Rothbucher D, Bischinger S, Ulmer H, et al. Incidence and risk of potential adverse drug interactions in the emergency room. Resuscitation 2001 Jun; 49(3): 283–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Janchawee B, Wongpoowarak W, Owatranporn T, et al. Pharmacoepidemiologic study of potential drug interactions in outpatients of a university hospital in Thailand. J Clin Pharm Ther 2005 Feb; 30(1): 13–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cruciol-Souza JM, Thomson JC. Prevalence of potential drug-drug interactions and its associated factors in a Brazilian teaching hospital. J Pharm Pharm Sci 2006; 9(3): 427–33PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Glintborg B, Andersen SE, Dalhoff K. Drug-drug interactions among recently hospitalised patients: frequent but mostly clinically insignificant. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2005 Oct; 61(9): 675–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Riechelmann RP, Zimmermann C, Chin SN, et al. Potential drug interactions in cancer patients receiving supportive care exclusively. J Pain Symptom Manage 2008 May; 35(5): 535–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hammes JA, Pfuetzenreiter F, da Silveira F, et al. Potential drug interactions prevalence in intensive care units. Rev Bras Ter Intensiva 2008; 20(4): 349–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tamblyn RM, McLeod PJ, Abrahamowicz M, et al. Do too many cooks spoil the broth? Multiple physician involvement in medical management of elderly patients and potentially inappropriate drug combinations. CMAJ 1996 Apr 15; 154(8): 1177–84PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Egger SS, Ratz Bravo AE, Hess L, et al. Age-related differences in the prevalence of potential drug-drug interactions in ambulatory dyslipidaemic patients treated with statins. Drugs Aging 2007; 24(5): 429–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gagne JJ, Maio V, Rabinowitz C. Prevalence and predictors of potential drug-drug interactions in Regione Emilia-Romagna, Italy. J Clin Pharm Ther 2008 Apr; 33(2): 141–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    World Health Organization (WHO). International classification of diseases. 10th rev. ed. WHO: Geneva, 1994Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ramiarina RA, Ramiarina BL, Almeida RM, et al. Comorbidity adjustment index for the International Classification of Diseases, 10th rev. Rev Saude Publica 2008 Aug; 42(4): 590–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Portela MC, Schramm JM, Pepe VL, et al. Algorithm for establishing hospital admittance data based on the hospital information system in the Brazilian Unified Health System. Cad Saude Publica 1997 Oct; 13(4): 771–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tatro D. Drug interaction facts 2007: facts and comparisons. St Louis (MO): Wolters Kluwer Health Inc., 2007Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Brookmeyer R, Crowley J. A confidence interval for the median survival time. Biometrics 1982 Mar; 38: 29–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vargas E, Simon J, Martin JC, et al. Effect of adverse drug reactions on length of stay in intensive care units. Clin Drug Investig 1998; 15(4): 353–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sierra P, Castillo J, Gomez M, et al. Potential and real drug interactions in critical care patients. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim 1997 Dec; 44(10): 383–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, et al. APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med 1985 Oct; 13(10): 818–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lemeshow S, Le Gall JR. Modeling the severity of illness of ICU patients: a systems update. JAMA 1994 Oct 5; 272(13): 1049–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schneitman-McIntire O, Farnen TA, Gordon N, et al. Medication misadventures resulting in emergency department visits at an HMO medical center. Am J Health Syst Pharm 1996 Jun 15; 53(12): 1416–22PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    McDonnell PJ, Jacobs MR. Hospital admissions resulting from preventable adverse drug reactions. Ann Pharmacother 2002 Sep; 36(9): 1331–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cristiano Moura
    • 1
    Email author
  • Nília Prado
    • 2
  • Francisco Acurcio
    • 3
  1. 1.Multidisciplinary Institute of Health, Federal University of Bahia Vitória da ConquistaBrazil
  2. 2.General Hospital of Vitória da Conquista, Vitória da ConquistaBrazil
  3. 3.Social Pharmacy DepartmentFederal University of Minas GeraisBelo HorizonteBrazil

Personalised recommendations