Pharmacological drug interactions in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia in hospital settings (based on electronic databases of reported drug interactions)

The article presents the results of a study of potential drug interactions in the treatment of moderate and severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in hospital settings. The study was conducted by analysis of treatment standards and data from real clinical practice regarding antimicrobial therapy. Methods. The study used the lists of drug products for medical use for the treatment of CAP (according to the standards of specialized medical care for moderate and severe CAP with complications). Also, the medical records of patients (n = 165) with CAP, hospitalized in hospitals of medical organizations (Nizhny Novgorod) were used. The study period was 2 years (2015 - 2016). The study included all patients admitted to the hospital during the analyzed period. CAP was treated in accordance with treatment standards. Results. The analysis of potential interactions of drugs used for moderate and severe CAP according to the treatment standards, showed that 27 and 72 drugs can be used, respectively. 325 potential interactions are possible in hospital settings for moderate CAP and 2,485 for severe CAP. According to the treatment standard, the number of minimally clinically significant potential interactions during the pharmacotherapy of moderate CAP in hospital settings is 8, the number moderately clinically significant interactions - 19; undesirable interactions - 7. In case of severe CAP, the number of potential interactions increases and amounts to 27 minimally clinically significant, 105 moderately clinically significant, and 41 undesirable. The analysis of the results of antimicrobial therapy in real clinical practice showed 4 therapeutic duplications (prescribing 2 β-lactam antibacterial drugs simultaneously) and 2 moderately clinically significant interactions during antimicrobial therapy in hospital 1. Only 1 therapeutic duplication was noted during antimicrobial therapy in hospital 2. Therapeutic overlap has been found between β-lactam antibacterial drugs (ceftaroline fosamil and meropenem). It is advisable to prescribe no more than one в-lactam antibacterial drug and it is inappropriate to include > 3 antimicrobial drugs in an antimicrobial regimen. Conclusion. Electronic databases simplify the selection of medicines and thus ensure the safe and effective use of registered drug interactions.

1. Sorensen J.M. Herb-drug, food-drug, nutrient-drug, and drug-drug interactions: mechanisms involved and their medical implications. J. Altern. Complement. Med. 2002; 8 (3): 293-308. DOI: 10.1089/10755530260127989.

2. Koecheler J.A., Abramowitz P.W., Swim S.E. et al. Indicators for the selection of ambulatory patients who warrant pharmacist monitoring. Am. J. Hosp. Pharm. 1989; 46: 729-732.

3. Pestrikova N.V., Karpova E.M., Mazina N.K. [Modern aspects of creating dosage forms as a prerequisite for the development of new pharmacotherapeutic technologies (literature review)]. Vyatskiy meditsinskiy vestnik. 2009; (2-4): 26-30 (in Russian).

4. Quinn D.I., Day R.O. Drug interactions of clinical importance. An updated guide. Drug Safety. 1995; 12 (6): 393-452. DOI: 10.2165/00002018-199512060-00005.

5. Sansom L.N., Evans A.M. What is the true clinical significance of plasma protein binding displacement interactions? Drug Saf. 1995; 12 (4): 227-233. DOI: 10.2165/00002018199512040-00001.

6. Roughead E.E., Kalisch L.M., Barratt J.D., Gilbert A.L. Prevalence of potentially hazardous drug interactions amongst Australian veterans. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2010; 70 (2): 252-257. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2010.03694.x.

7. Becker M.L. Caspers P.W., Kallewaard M. et al. Determinants of potential drug-drug interaction associated dispensing in community pharmacies in the Netherlands. Pharm. World Sci. 2007; 29 (2): 51-57. DOI: 10.1007/s11096-006-9061-3.

8. Dechanont S., Maphanta S., Butthum B., Kongkaew C. Hospital admissions/visits associated with drug-drug inter actions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pharmaco-epidemiol. Drug Saf. 2014; 23 (5): 489-497. DOI: 10.1002/pds.3592.

9. Fuhr U. Improvement in the handling of drug-drug interactions. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2008; 64 (2): 167-171. DOI: 10.1007/s00228-007-0436-8.

10. Patel P., Zed P.J. Drug-related visits to the emergency department: how big is the problem? Pharmacotherapy. 2002; 22 (7): 915-923. DOI: 10.1592/phco.22.11.915.33630.

11. Day R.O., Snowden L., McLachlan A.J. Life-threatening drug interactions: what the physician needs to know. Intern. Med. J. 2017; 47 (5): 501-512. DOI: 10.1111/imj.13404.

12. Sinopal'nikov A.I., Kozlov R.I. [Community-acquired respiratory tract infections: a guide for physicians]. Moscow: Prem'er MT, Nash Gorod; 2007 (in Russian).

13. Zhukova O.V., Ruina O.V., Kuzovatova E.A. et al. [The cost and effectiveness of antibacterial therapy of community-acquired pneumonia in a typical hospital practice]. Meditsinskie tekhnologii. Otsenka i vybor. 2016; 3 (25): 89-95 (in Russian).

14. Zhukova O.V., Ruina O.V., Khazov M.V., Romanov S.V. [Antimicrobial therapy of community-acquired pneumonia in a hospital setting (clinical and economic aspects)]. Farmakoekonomika. Sovremennaya farmakoekonomika i farmakoepidemiologiya. 2018; 11 (1): 37-44 (in Russian).

15. Zhukova O.V., Ruina O.V., Kononova S.V. [Pharmacoeconomic analysis of hospital antimicrobial therapy of community-acquired pneumonia using DDD and DU90% methods]. Pul'monologiya. 2018; 28 (4): 430-435. DOI: 10.18093/0869-0189-2018-28-4-430-435 (in Russian).

16. Ignat'eva V.I., Avksent'eva M.V. [The analysis of methodologic characteristics of researches on social and economic burden of diseases in russia in the frames of development of standard cost of illness methodology for the health technology assessment]. Farmakoekonomika. Sovremennaya farmakoekonomika i farmakoepidemiologiya. 2014; 7 (3): 3-11 (in Russian).

17. Oleynikov V.E., Eliseeva I.V., Tomashevskaya Yu.A. et al. [The efficacy of antihypertensive therapy in elderly patients and treatment compliance analysis]. Ratsional'naya farmakoterapiya v kardiologii. 2014; 10 (4): 391-396 (in Russian).

18. Avksent'eva M.V., Omel'yanovskiy V.V. [Health technology assessment: international experience]. Meditsinskie tekhnologii. Otsenka i vybor. 2010; (1): 52-58 (in Russian).

19. Atella V., Bhattacharya J., Carbonari L. Pharmaceutical price controls and minimum efficacy regulation: evidence from the United States and Italy. Health Serv. Res. 2012; 47 (1, Pt 1): 293-308. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2011.01333.x.

20. Khafiz'yanova R.Kh., Burykin I.M., Aleeva G.N. [Classification of defects pharmacotherapy as the basis of quality assessment of drug therapy in healthcare]. Byulleten' sibirskoy meditsiny. 2013; 12 (3): 82-91 (in Russian).