Patients' Use and Perceptions of a Drug-Drug Interaction Database: A Survey of Janusmed Interactions

Drug stewardship in chronic kidney disease to achieve effective and safe medication use

People living with chronic kidney disease (CKD) often experience multimorbidity and require polypharmacy. Kidney dysfunction can also alter the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of medications, which can modify their risks and benefits; the extent of these changes is not well understood for all situations or medications. The principle of drug stewardship is aimed at maximizing medication safety and effectiveness in a population of patients through a variety of processes including medication reconciliation, medication selection, dose adjustment, monitoring for effectiveness and safety, and discontinuation (deprescribing) when no longer necessary. This Review is aimed at serving as a resource for achieving optimal drug stewardship for patients with CKD. We describe special considerations for medication use during pregnancy and lactation, during acute illness and in patients with cancer, as well as guidance for the responsible use of over-the-counter drugs, herbal remedies, supplements and sick-day rules. We also highlight inequities in medication access worldwide and suggest policies to improve access to quality and essential medications for all persons with CKD. Further strategies to promote drug stewardship include patient education and engagement, the use of digital health tools, shared decision-making and collaboration within interdisciplinary teams. Throughout, we position the person with CKD at the centre of all drug stewardship efforts.

Serious adverse drug events associated with psychotropic treatment of bipolar or schizoaffective disorder: a 17-year follow-up on the LiSIE retrospective cohort study

Introduction

Mood stabilisers and other psychotropic drugs can lead to serious adverse drug events (ADEs). However, the incidence remains unknown. We aimed to (a) determine the incidence of serious ADEs in patients with bipolar or schizoaffective disorders, (b) explore the role of lithium exposure, and (c) describe the aetiology.

Methods

This study is part of the LiSIE (Lithium-Study into Effects and Side Effects) retrospective cohort study. Between 2001 and 2017, patients in the Swedish region of Norrbotten, with a diagnosis of bipolar or schizoaffective disorder, were screened for serious ADEs to psychotropic drugs, having resulted in critical, post-anaesthesia, or intensive care. We determined the incidence rate of serious ADEs/1,000 person-years (PY).

Results

In 1,521 patients, we identified 41 serious ADEs, yielding an incidence rate of 1.9 events per 1,000 PY. The incidence rate ratio (IRR) between ADEs with lithium present and causally implicated and ADEs without lithium exposure was significant at 2.59 (95% CI 1.20-5.51; p = 0.0094). The IRR of ADEs in patients <65 and ≥65 years was significant at 3.36 (95% CI 1.63-6.63; p = 0.0007). The most common ADEs were chronic lithium intoxication, oversedation, and cardiac/blood pressure-related events.

Discussion

Serious ADEs related to treatment of bipolar (BD) or schizoaffective disorder (SZD) were uncommon but not rare. Older individuals were particularly at risk. The risk was higher in individuals exposed to lithium. Serum lithium concentration should always be checked when patients present with new or unclear somatic symptoms. However, severe ADEs also occurred with other mood stabilisers and other psychotropic drugs.

Shared Decision-Making for Drug-Drug Interactions: Formative Evaluation of an Anticoagulant Drug Interaction

Background

Warnings about drug-drug interactions (DDIs) between warfarin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) within electronic health records indicate potential harm but fail to account for contextual factors and preferences. We developed a tool called DDInteract to enhance and support shared decision-making (SDM) between patients and physicians when both warfarin and NSAIDs are used concurrently. DDInteract was designed to be integrated into electronic health records using interoperability standards.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to conduct a formative evaluation of a DDInteract that incorporates patient and product contextual factors to estimate the risk of bleeding.

Methods

A randomized formative evaluation was conducted to compare DDInteract to usual care (UC) using physician-patient dyads. Using case vignettes, physicians and patients on warfarin participated in simulated virtual clinical encounters where they discussed the use of taking ibuprofen and warfarin concurrently and determined an appropriate therapeutic plan based on the patient’s individualized risk. Dyads were randomized to either DDInteract or UC. Participants completed a postsession interview and survey of the SDM process. This included the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9), tool usability and workload National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Task Load Index, Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC) scale, System Usability Scale (SUS), and Decision Conflict Scale (DCS). They also were interviewed after the session to obtain perceptions on DDInteract and UC resources for DDIs.

Results

Twelve dyad encounters were performed using virtual software. Most (n=11, 91.7%) patients were over 50 years of age, and 9 (75%) had been taking warfarin for more than 2 years (75%). Regarding scores on the SDM-Q-9, participants rated DDInteract higher than UC for questions pertaining to helping patients clarify the decision (P=.03), involving patients in the decision (P=.01), displaying treatment options (P<.001), identifying advantages and disadvantages (P=.01), and facilitating patient understanding (P=.01) and discussion of preferences (P=.01). Five of the 8 UTAUT constructs showed differences between the 2 groups, favoring DDInteract (P<.05). Usability ratings from the SUS were significantly higher (P<.05) for physicians using DDInteract compared to those in the UC group but showed no differences from the patient’s perspective. No differences in patient responses were observed between groups using the DCS. During the session debrief, physicians indicated little concern for the additional time or workload entailed by DDInteract use. Both clinicians and patients indicated that the tool was beneficial in simulated encounters to understand and mitigate the risk of harm from this DDI.

Conclusions

Overall, DDInteract may improve encounters where there is a risk of bleeding due to a potential drug-drug interaction involving anticoagulants. Participants rated DDInteract as logical and useful for enhancing SDM. They reported that they would be willing to use the tool for an interaction involving warfarin and NSAIDs.

Current Knowledge about Providing Drug-Drug Interaction Services for Patients-A Scoping Review

Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) pose a major problem to patient safety. eHealth solutions have the potential to address this problem and generally improve medication management by providing digital services for health care professionals and patients. Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) to alert physicians or pharmacists about DDIs are common, and there is an extensive body of research about CDSS for professionals. Information about DDIs is commonly requested by patients, but little is known about providing similar support to patients. The aim of this scoping review was to explore and describe current knowledge about providing digital DDI services for patients. Using a broad search strategy and an established framework for scoping reviews, 19 papers were included. The results show that although some patients want to check for DDIs themselves, there are differences between patients, in terms of demands and ability. There are numerous DDI services available, but the existence of large variations regarding service quality implies potential safety issues. The review includes suggestions about design features but also indicates a substantial knowledge gap highlighting the need for further research about how to best design and provide digital DDI to patients without risking patient safety or having other unintended consequences.