Consensus Recommendations for Systematic Evaluation of Drug–Drug Interaction Evidence for Clinical Decision Support

Richard T. Scheife, Lisa E. Hines, Richard D. Boyce, Sophie P. Chung, Jeremiah D. Momper, Christine D. Sommer, Darrell R. Abernethy, John R. Horn, Stephen J. Sklar, Samantha K. Wong, Gretchen Jones, Mary L. Brown, Amy J Jones-Grizzle, Susan Comes, Tricia Lee Wilkins, Clarissa Borst, Michael A. Wittie, Daniel C Malone

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

57 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Methods: A conference series was conducted to develop a structured process to improve the quality of DDI alerting systems. Three expert workgroups were assembled to address the goals of the conference. The Evidence Workgroup consisted of 18 individuals with expertise in pharmacology, drug information, biomedical informatics, and clinical decision support. Workgroup members met via webinar 12 times from January 2013 to February 2014. Two in-person meetings were conducted in May and September 2013 to reach consensus on recommendations.

Results: We developed expert consensus answers to the following three key questions. (i) What is the best approach to evaluate DDI evidence? (ii) What evidence is required for a DDI to be applicable to an entire class of drugs? (iii) How should a structured evaluation process be vetted and validated?

Conclusion: Evidence-based decision support for DDIs requires consistent application of transparent and systematic methods to evaluate the evidence. Drug compendia and clinical decision support systems in which these recommendations are implemented should be able to provide higher-quality information about DDIs.

Background: Healthcare organizations, compendia, and drug knowledgebase vendors use varying methods to evaluate and synthesize evidence on drug–drug interactions (DDIs). This situation has a negative effect on electronic prescribing and medication information systems that warn clinicians of potentially harmful medication combinations.

Objective: The aim of this study was to provide recommendations for systematic evaluation of evidence for DDIs from the scientific literature, drug product labeling, and regulatory documents.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)197-206
Number of pages10
JournalDrug Safety
Volume38
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2015

Fingerprint

Clinical Decision Support Systems
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Drug Labeling
Electronic Prescribing
Medication Systems
Literature
Informatics
Knowledge Bases
Decision support systems
Information Systems
Drug products
Labeling
Information systems
Pharmacology
Delivery of Health Care

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology (medical)
  • Pharmacology
  • Toxicology

Cite this

Consensus Recommendations for Systematic Evaluation of Drug–Drug Interaction Evidence for Clinical Decision Support. / Scheife, Richard T.; Hines, Lisa E.; Boyce, Richard D.; Chung, Sophie P.; Momper, Jeremiah D.; Sommer, Christine D.; Abernethy, Darrell R.; Horn, John R.; Sklar, Stephen J.; Wong, Samantha K.; Jones, Gretchen; Brown, Mary L.; Jones-Grizzle, Amy J; Comes, Susan; Wilkins, Tricia Lee; Borst, Clarissa; Wittie, Michael A.; Malone, Daniel C.

In: Drug Safety, Vol. 38, No. 2, 2015, p. 197-206.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Scheife, RT, Hines, LE, Boyce, RD, Chung, SP, Momper, JD, Sommer, CD, Abernethy, DR, Horn, JR, Sklar, SJ, Wong, SK, Jones, G, Brown, ML, Jones-Grizzle, AJ, Comes, S, Wilkins, TL, Borst, C, Wittie, MA & Malone, DC 2015, 'Consensus Recommendations for Systematic Evaluation of Drug–Drug Interaction Evidence for Clinical Decision Support', Drug Safety, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 197-206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-014-0262-8
Scheife, Richard T. ; Hines, Lisa E. ; Boyce, Richard D. ; Chung, Sophie P. ; Momper, Jeremiah D. ; Sommer, Christine D. ; Abernethy, Darrell R. ; Horn, John R. ; Sklar, Stephen J. ; Wong, Samantha K. ; Jones, Gretchen ; Brown, Mary L. ; Jones-Grizzle, Amy J ; Comes, Susan ; Wilkins, Tricia Lee ; Borst, Clarissa ; Wittie, Michael A. ; Malone, Daniel C. / Consensus Recommendations for Systematic Evaluation of Drug–Drug Interaction Evidence for Clinical Decision Support. In: Drug Safety. 2015 ; Vol. 38, No. 2. pp. 197-206.
@article{105fcda1de0943438e744b34ef0f2142,
title = "Consensus Recommendations for Systematic Evaluation of Drug–Drug Interaction Evidence for Clinical Decision Support",
abstract = "Methods: A conference series was conducted to develop a structured process to improve the quality of DDI alerting systems. Three expert workgroups were assembled to address the goals of the conference. The Evidence Workgroup consisted of 18 individuals with expertise in pharmacology, drug information, biomedical informatics, and clinical decision support. Workgroup members met via webinar 12 times from January 2013 to February 2014. Two in-person meetings were conducted in May and September 2013 to reach consensus on recommendations.Results: We developed expert consensus answers to the following three key questions. (i) What is the best approach to evaluate DDI evidence? (ii) What evidence is required for a DDI to be applicable to an entire class of drugs? (iii) How should a structured evaluation process be vetted and validated?Conclusion: Evidence-based decision support for DDIs requires consistent application of transparent and systematic methods to evaluate the evidence. Drug compendia and clinical decision support systems in which these recommendations are implemented should be able to provide higher-quality information about DDIs.Background: Healthcare organizations, compendia, and drug knowledgebase vendors use varying methods to evaluate and synthesize evidence on drug–drug interactions (DDIs). This situation has a negative effect on electronic prescribing and medication information systems that warn clinicians of potentially harmful medication combinations.Objective: The aim of this study was to provide recommendations for systematic evaluation of evidence for DDIs from the scientific literature, drug product labeling, and regulatory documents.",
author = "Scheife, {Richard T.} and Hines, {Lisa E.} and Boyce, {Richard D.} and Chung, {Sophie P.} and Momper, {Jeremiah D.} and Sommer, {Christine D.} and Abernethy, {Darrell R.} and Horn, {John R.} and Sklar, {Stephen J.} and Wong, {Samantha K.} and Gretchen Jones and Brown, {Mary L.} and Jones-Grizzle, {Amy J} and Susan Comes and Wilkins, {Tricia Lee} and Clarissa Borst and Wittie, {Michael A.} and Malone, {Daniel C}",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1007/s40264-014-0262-8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "38",
pages = "197--206",
journal = "Drug Safety",
issn = "0114-5916",
publisher = "Adis International Ltd",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Consensus Recommendations for Systematic Evaluation of Drug–Drug Interaction Evidence for Clinical Decision Support

AU - Scheife, Richard T.

AU - Hines, Lisa E.

AU - Boyce, Richard D.

AU - Chung, Sophie P.

AU - Momper, Jeremiah D.

AU - Sommer, Christine D.

AU - Abernethy, Darrell R.

AU - Horn, John R.

AU - Sklar, Stephen J.

AU - Wong, Samantha K.

AU - Jones, Gretchen

AU - Brown, Mary L.

AU - Jones-Grizzle, Amy J

AU - Comes, Susan

AU - Wilkins, Tricia Lee

AU - Borst, Clarissa

AU - Wittie, Michael A.

AU - Malone, Daniel C

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Methods: A conference series was conducted to develop a structured process to improve the quality of DDI alerting systems. Three expert workgroups were assembled to address the goals of the conference. The Evidence Workgroup consisted of 18 individuals with expertise in pharmacology, drug information, biomedical informatics, and clinical decision support. Workgroup members met via webinar 12 times from January 2013 to February 2014. Two in-person meetings were conducted in May and September 2013 to reach consensus on recommendations.Results: We developed expert consensus answers to the following three key questions. (i) What is the best approach to evaluate DDI evidence? (ii) What evidence is required for a DDI to be applicable to an entire class of drugs? (iii) How should a structured evaluation process be vetted and validated?Conclusion: Evidence-based decision support for DDIs requires consistent application of transparent and systematic methods to evaluate the evidence. Drug compendia and clinical decision support systems in which these recommendations are implemented should be able to provide higher-quality information about DDIs.Background: Healthcare organizations, compendia, and drug knowledgebase vendors use varying methods to evaluate and synthesize evidence on drug–drug interactions (DDIs). This situation has a negative effect on electronic prescribing and medication information systems that warn clinicians of potentially harmful medication combinations.Objective: The aim of this study was to provide recommendations for systematic evaluation of evidence for DDIs from the scientific literature, drug product labeling, and regulatory documents.

AB - Methods: A conference series was conducted to develop a structured process to improve the quality of DDI alerting systems. Three expert workgroups were assembled to address the goals of the conference. The Evidence Workgroup consisted of 18 individuals with expertise in pharmacology, drug information, biomedical informatics, and clinical decision support. Workgroup members met via webinar 12 times from January 2013 to February 2014. Two in-person meetings were conducted in May and September 2013 to reach consensus on recommendations.Results: We developed expert consensus answers to the following three key questions. (i) What is the best approach to evaluate DDI evidence? (ii) What evidence is required for a DDI to be applicable to an entire class of drugs? (iii) How should a structured evaluation process be vetted and validated?Conclusion: Evidence-based decision support for DDIs requires consistent application of transparent and systematic methods to evaluate the evidence. Drug compendia and clinical decision support systems in which these recommendations are implemented should be able to provide higher-quality information about DDIs.Background: Healthcare organizations, compendia, and drug knowledgebase vendors use varying methods to evaluate and synthesize evidence on drug–drug interactions (DDIs). This situation has a negative effect on electronic prescribing and medication information systems that warn clinicians of potentially harmful medication combinations.Objective: The aim of this study was to provide recommendations for systematic evaluation of evidence for DDIs from the scientific literature, drug product labeling, and regulatory documents.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84925482075&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84925482075&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s40264-014-0262-8

DO - 10.1007/s40264-014-0262-8

M3 - Article

C2 - 25556085

AN - SCOPUS:84925482075

VL - 38

SP - 197

EP - 206

JO - Drug Safety

JF - Drug Safety

SN - 0114-5916

IS - 2

ER -