Adherence to black box warnings for prescription medications in outpatients

被引:64
作者
Lasser, KE
Seger, DL
Yu, DT
Karson, AS
Fiskio, JM
Seger, AC
Shah, NR
Gandhi, TK
Rothschild, JM
Bates, DW
机构
[1] Cambridge Hlth Alliance, Dept Med, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
[2] Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
[3] Partners HealthCare Syst, Wellesley, MA USA
[4] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Div Gen Med & Primary Care, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[5] Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Boston, MA USA
[6] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Dept Med, Boston, MA 02114 USA
[7] Massachusetts Coll Pharm & Hlth Sci, Boston, MA USA
关键词
D O I
10.1001/archinte.166.3.338
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Few data are available regarding the prevalence of potentially dangerous drug-drug, drug-laboratory, and drug-disease interactions among outpatients. Our objectives were to determine how frequently clinicians prescribe drugs in violation of black box warnings for these issues and to determine how frequently such prescribing results in harm. Methods: In an observational study of 51 outpatient practices using an electronic health record, we measured the frequency with which patients received prescriptions in violation of black box warnings for drug-drug, drug laboratory, and/or drug-disease interactions. We performed medical record reviews in a sample of patients to detect adverse drug events. Multivariate analysis was conducted to assess the relationship of prescribing in violation of black box warnings to patient and clinician characteristics, adjusting for potential confounders and clustering. Results: Of 324 548 outpatients who received a medication in 2002, 2354 (0.7%) received a prescription in violation of a black box warning. After adjustment, receipt of medication in violation of a black box warning was more likely when patients were 75 years or older or female. The number of medications taken, the number of medical problems, and the site of care were also associated with violations. Less than 1% of patients who received a drug in violation of a black box warning had an adverse drug event as a result. Conclusions: About 7 in 1000 outpatients received a prescription violating a black box warning. Few incidents resulted in detectable harm.
引用
收藏
页码:338 / 344
页数:7
相关论文
共 26 条
[21]   Clarifying adverse drug events: A clinician's guide to terminology, documentation, and reporting [J].
Nebeker, JR ;
Barach, P ;
Samore, MH .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2004, 140 (10) :795-801
[22]   Contraindicated use of cisapride - Impact of food and drug administration regulatory action [J].
Smalley, W ;
Shatin, D ;
Wysowski, DK ;
Gurwitz, J ;
Andrade, SE ;
Goodman, M ;
Chan, KA ;
Platt, R ;
Schech, SD ;
Ray, WA .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2000, 284 (23) :3036-3039
[23]   Missing clinical information during primary care visits [J].
Smith, PC ;
Araya-Guerra, R ;
Bublitz, C ;
Parnes, B ;
Dickinson, LM ;
Van Vorst, R ;
Westfall, JM ;
Pace, WD .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2005, 293 (05) :565-571
[24]   Monitoring amiodarone's toxicities: Recommendations, evidence, and clinical practice [J].
Stelfox, HT ;
Ahmed, SB ;
Fiskio, J ;
Bates, DW .
CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 2004, 75 (01) :110-122
[25]  
Walker A M, 1995, Arch Fam Med, V4, P24, DOI 10.1001/archfami.4.1.24
[26]   LONGITUDINAL DATA-ANALYSIS FOR DISCRETE AND CONTINUOUS OUTCOMES [J].
ZEGER, SL ;
LIANG, KY .
BIOMETRICS, 1986, 42 (01) :121-130