Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Requirements for a successful implementation of drug interaction information systems in general practice: results of a questionnaire survey in Germany

  • Pharmacoepidemiology and Prescription
  • Published:
European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective: To determine drug interaction information requirements in general practice with respect to both content and mode of presentation. Methods: In a mail survey among 2,000 general practitioners in south-west Germany, we collected information on risk evaluation of drug interactions and combinations of concern, usage of and satisfaction with the current information sources, desirable content and mode of future presentation and demographic variables. Categorical variables were compared using χ2 test. Trends were analysed with Cochran–Armitage test and determinants of literature usage with logistic regression. Results: Response rate was 60.8%. The majority of general practitioners considered drug interactions a risk factor in prescribing (88.6%). For 18.2% of the drug combinations most frequently indicated as interacting, there was no published evidence of a clinically relevant interaction. More than half of the participants were dissatisfied with the information on severity, mechanism, and dose adjustment currently available in their sources. In particular, non-interacting alternatives were thought to be lacking (86.9%). Users of drug interaction software more frequently retrieved drug interaction information than non-users [odds ratio (OR) 1.95; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.50, 2.52], but only 28.6% of general practitioners had access to such systems. There was a significant trend towards electronic sources among younger physicians, but at present, 41.7% of general practitioners favour printed sources, and 8.8% would refuse to use electronic sources. Conclusion: General practitioners wish for more informative support on drug interactions, especially concerning management. Despite a trend towards electronic information sources, printed documents are presently still required to reach all prescribers.

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

Fig. 1a

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bjerrum L, Andersen M, Petersen G, Kragstrup J (2003) Exposure to potential drug interactions in primary health care. Scand J Prim Health Care 21:153–158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Merlo J, Liedholm H, Lindblad U, Björck-Linné A, Fält J, Lindberg G et al (2001) Prescriptions with potential drug interactions dispensed at Swedish pharmacies in January 1999: cross sectional study. BMJ 323:427–428

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bergk V, Gasse C, Rothenbacher D, Loew M, Brenner H, Haefeli WE (2004) Drug interactions in primary care: impact of a new algorithm on risk determination. Clin Pharmacol Ther 76:85–96

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hamilton RA, Briceland LL, Andritz MH (1998) Frequency of hospitalization after exposure to known drug-drug interactions in a Medicaid population. Pharmacotherapy 18:1112–1120

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Halkin H, Katzir I, Kurman I, Jan J, Malkin BB (2001) Preventing drug interaction by online prescription screening in community pharmacies and medical practices. Clin Pharmacol Ther 69:260–265

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Tamblyn R, Huang A, Perreault R, Jacques A, Roy D, Hanley J et al (2003) The medical office of the 21st century (MOXXI): effectiveness of computerized decision-making support in reducing inappropriate prescribing in primary care. CMAJ 169:549–556

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bates DW, Leape LL, Cullen DJ, Laird N, Petersen LA, Teich JM et al (1998) Effect of computerized physician order entry and a team intervention on prevention of serious medication errors. JAMA 280:1311–1316

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Magnus D, Rodgers S, Avery AJ (2002) GPs’ views on computerized drug interaction alerts: questionnaire survey. J Clin Pharm Ther 27:377–382

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Glassman PA, Simon B, Belperio P, Lanto A (2002) Improving recognition of drug interactions: benefits and barriers to using automated drug alerts. Med Care 40:1161–1171

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Weingart SN, Toth M, Sands DZ, Aronson MD, Davis RB, Russell PS (2003) Physicians’ decision to override computerized drug alerts in primary care. Arch Intern Med 163:2625–2631

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bates DW, Kuperman GJ, Wang S, Gandhi T, Kittler A, Volk L et al (2003) Ten commandments for effective clinical decision support: making the practice of evidence-based medicine a reality. J Am Med Inform Assoc 10:523–530

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Watkins C, Harvey I, Langley C, Faulkner A, Gray S (1999) General practitioners’ use of computers during the consultation. Br J Gen Pract 49:381–383

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Zentralinstitut für die kassenärztliche Versorgung (2003) ZI-ADT-Panel Nordrhein, Patienten-/Praxenstichprobe: I/2003, Tabelle A1: Diagnosenspektrum von Patienten. Zentralinstitut für die kassenärztliche Versorgung, Cologne, Germany

  14. Stockley IH (2002) Drug interactions, a source book of adverse interactions, their mechanisms, clinical importance and management. The Pharmaceutical Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hansten PD, Horn JR (2003) Drug interactions analysis and management. Facts and Comparisons, St. Louis

    Google Scholar 

  16. Klasko RK (ed) (2003) DRUGDEX® System, 1 st edn. Thomson MICROMEDEX, Greenwood Village

    Google Scholar 

  17. BPI Service GmbH (2004) FachInfo-Service Fachinformationsverzeichnis Deutschland (einschließlich EU-Zulassungen). Available at: URL: http://www.fachinfo.de

  18. Statistisches Bundesamt (2002) Fachserie 11, Reihe 4.2, Tabelle 4, Prüfungen an Hochschulen, Prüfungsjahr 2002. Statistisches Bundesamt, Wiesbaden

  19. Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung (2003) I. 21–Zahl der Vertragsärzte je Jahrgang zum 31.12.2002. Available at: URL: http://www.kbv.de/publikationen/190.htm

  20. Rote Liste® Service GmbH (2004) Rote Liste®. Available at: URL:http://www.rote-liste.de

  21. MediMedia GmbH (2004) Gelbe Liste Pharmindex. Available at: URL:http://www.gelbe-liste.de

  22. ABDATA Pharma-Daten-Service (2003) ABDA-Datenbank. Werbe- und Vertriebsgesellschaft Deutscher Apotheker mbH, Eschborn, Germany

  23. Sweetman SC (ed) (2003) Martindale: the complete drug reference (Electronic version). Thomson MICROMEDEX, Greenwood Village

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bates DW, Cullen DJ, Laird N, Petersen LA, Small SD, Servi D et al (1995) Incidence of adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events: implications for prevention. ADE Prevention Study Group. JAMA 274:29–34

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Juurlink DN, Mamdani M, Kopp A, Laupacis A, Redelmeier DA (2003) Drug-drug interactions among elderly patients hospitalized for drug toxicity. JAMA 289:1652–1658

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Corsini A, Bellosta S, Baetta R, Fumagalli R, Paoletti R, Bernini F (1999) New insights into the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties of statins. Pharmacol Ther 84:413–428

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Rajpal A, Reidenberg MM (2003) Drug labling should be kept current. Clin Pharmacol Ther 73:4–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mullen WH, Anderson IB, Kim SY, Blanc PD, Olson KR (1997) Incorrect overdose management advice in the Physicians’ Desk Reference. Ann Emerg Med 29:255–261

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. McColl A, Smith H, White P, Field J (1998) General practitioners’ perceptions of the route to evidence based medicine: a questionnaire survey. BMJ 316:361–365

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Koller M, Grütter R, Peltenburg M, Fischer JE, Steurer J (2001) Use of the Internet by medical doctors in Switzerland. Swiss Med Wkly 131:251–254

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Reng C-M, Friedrich H-J, Timmer A, Schölmerich J (2003) Fachinformationen für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Deutschland. Med Klin 98:648–655

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the general practitioners in Baden-Württemberg for their participation in the study. This research was supported by the Graduiertenkolleg 793 (German Research Foundation, DFG) and by BMBF grant 01EC9902 from the German Federal Ministry for Education and Research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Internal Medicine VI, Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 410, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany

    Verena Bergk, Christiane Gasse & Walter E. Haefeli

  2. Research Methodology Center, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany

    Rainer Schnell

Authors
  1. Verena Bergk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christiane Gasse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rainer Schnell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Walter E. Haefeli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Walter E. Haefeli.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

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 60, 595–602 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-004-0812-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-004-0812-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation