https://scholars.lib.ntu.edu.tw/handle/123456789/112042
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor | 陳為堅 | en |
dc.contributor | 臺灣大學:流行病學研究所 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author | 林美淑 | zh |
dc.contributor.author | Lin, Mei-Shu | en |
dc.creator | 林美淑 | zh |
dc.creator | Lin, Mei-Shu | en |
dc.date | 2006 | en |
dc.date.accessioned | 2007-11-27T02:59:20Z | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-06-29T17:46:58Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2007-11-27T02:59:20Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2018-06-29T17:46:58Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2006 | - |
dc.identifier | en-US | en |
dc.identifier.uri | http://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw//handle/246246/56229 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 背景 高血壓病患常因高齡、盛行率高、降血壓藥經由肝代謝及同時有多種疾病需服藥,比一般人更易造成潛在藥品交互作用的危險。當兩種藥品發生一級潛在藥品交互作用,臨床上不一定絕對禁用,有時因病情需要併用,因此本研究將進一步,將一級潛在藥品交互作用區分為需避免併用及需調整劑量兩類,做為臨床應用的參考。另外,本研究將估計台灣高血壓病患發生潛在藥品交互作用的盛行率及常見潛在交互作用配對導致的住院率。 方法 我們採用橫斷研究估計潛在藥品交互作用的盛行率,並採用回溯性世代研究估計因藥品交互作用導致的住院。資料來源為1997年至2001年全民健保承保歸人抽樣資料庫中,高血壓病患的所有處方用藥。潛在藥品交互作用的分析範圍,包含同一張處方及不同處方(同一家醫院及不同醫院)。 本研究採用邏輯式分析,估計潛在藥品交互作用是否存在與住院發生的相對危險性。另採用chi-square分析年齡、性別、慢性病數目與用藥品項數等變項與潛在藥品交互作用的相關性。所有資料使用SAS 9.1版軟體分析(SAS Institute, Cary, NC),潛在藥品交互作用的配對採用SAS-SQL程式。所有檢定採用雙尾檢定(α = 0.05)。 結果 資料庫中共有23,925位高血壓病患,無論一般處方箋或高血壓處方箋,以處方箋計算,潛在藥品交互作用都有逐年下降的趨勢,平均盛行率分別為10.5%及30.5%。最常見需避免併用的一級潛在藥品交互作用的藥品為cisapride,其中以不同醫院的處方發生交互作用的情形最嚴重。最常見需調整劑量的一級潛在藥品交互作用的藥品為digoxin。潛在藥品交互作用的比例與年齡、用藥品項數及合併的慢性病數目成正比。最常見與二級潛在藥品交互作用相關的藥品為降血糖的sulfonamide urea derivatives,導致住院的相對危險性為1.71 (95% 信賴區間為1.01-2.89). 結論 高齡及合併多種疾病的高血壓病患,更容易因潛在藥品交互作用,導致不良反應的危險性。本研究發現,不同醫院的處方箋比同一張處方箋的藥品,更容易因交互作用發生嚴重的不良反應而住院。若能將本研究發現的臨床上較重要的交互作用配對,建置於醫師的開方畫面,進一步若能串聯不同醫院的藥歷,避免不同處方發生交互作用的危險,將更能提升台灣病患用藥的安全性。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Background The coincidence of patients with the more elderly, the high prevalence, combination drug therapy, hepatic metabolisms of antihypertensive drugs and drug-treated comorbid conditions might result in higher possibility of many drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in patients with hypertension. Our study purposes were to estimate prevalence, incidence of hospital admission associated with common potential DDIs and identify the pairings of significance ‘1’ potential DDIs those should be avoided or need dose adjustment for drug safety. Methods We used cross-sectional study to estimate the prevalence of potential DDIs and used the retrospective cohort study to estimate the incidence of hospital admission. The data resources were all prescriptions taken by patients with hypertension in the cohort-sampling databases of national health insurance from 1997 through 2001. The potential DDIs induced from the same prescription and different prescriptions were analyzed in this study. The Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate relative risks of admission incidences. The χP2 Pstatistic was used to evaluate the association of the variables (e.g.,age, sex, number of chronic diseases and of medications). All data were analyzed with SAS 9.1 software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC) and the potential DDIs were selected with SAS-SQL program. All significant test was two-tailed with α = 0.05. Results We found 23,925 patients with hypertension in the database. The prevalences of potential DDIs by prescription in general prescriptions and hypertensive prescriptions were reduced yearly and the mean prevalence with 10.5% and 30.5%, respectively. The most common significance ‘1’ potential DDIs those should be avoided was cisapride, especially in the prescriptions from different hospital. The most common significance ‘1’ potential DDIs those need dose adjustment was associated with digoxin. The ratios of potential DDIs were proportional to age, drug items of prescriptions and concomitant numbers of chronic diseases. The most common medications associated with significance ‘2’ potential DDIs were sulfonamide urea derivatives and the admission incidence was 1.71 (95% CI 1.01-2.89). Conclusions Patients with hypertension, especially elderly and multiple illness, had higher risk to occur serious adverse drug reaction from potential DDIs. We found the most important source of potential DDIs was the prescriptions from different hospitals. The electronic file of common potential DDIs that we set up could be implemented to the computer system and integrated with the drug history from the network of different hospitals for drug safety. | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | Abstract in Chinese------------------------------------1 Abstract in English------------------------------------3 I. Introduction----------------------------------------5 II. Methods--------------------------------------------10 III. Results-------------------------------------------14 IV. Discussion-----------------------------------------19 V. Conclusions-----------------------------------------24 References---------------------------------------------25 Tables Table 1. The metabolic pathway of antihypertensive drugs -----------------------------------------31 Table 2. The ATC code of Timolol for cardiovascular effect ---------------------------------------33 Table 3. The classification of DDIs pairs --------------------------------------------------------------34 Table 4. A file of potential DDIs (example) -----------------------------------------------------------35 Table 5. Prevalence of potential DDIs in total prescriptions-----------------------------------------36 Table 6. Comparison of sex and age in hypertensive prescriptions---------------------------------37 Table 7. Prevalence of potential DDIs in hypertensive prescriptions-------------------------------38 Table 8. Analysis of hypertensive prescriptions with potential DDIs among different hospitals -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------39 Table 9. Analysis of clinical significance in hypertensive prescriptions with potential DDIs among different hospitals----------------------------------------------------------------------40 Table 10. Comparison of clinical significances in potential DDIs and age -----------------------41 Table 11. Age stratification in clinical significances of potential DDIs----------------------------42 Table 12. Top 10 potential DDIs of significance ‘1’ in hypertensive prescriptions---------------43 Table 13. Significance ‘1’ potential DDIs those should be avoided -------------------------------45 Table 14. Significance ‘1’ potential DDIs those need dose adjustment----------------------------48 Table 15. Ratios between potential DDIs and drug items -------------------------------------------51 Table 16. Comparisons of numbers of chronic disease between total hypertensive patients and patients with potential DDI-------------------------------------- ----------------------------52 Table 17. The top 10 chronic diseases in hypertensive patients-------------------------------------53 Table 18. The admission incidence of top 5 medications associated with significance ‘1’ those should be avoided in the same prescription------------------------------------------------54 Table 19. Analysis of digoxin and warfarin in total hypertensive patients------------------------55 Table 20. Significance ‘1’ potential DDIs those should be avoided from different hospitals ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------56 Table 21. The admission incidence of common medications associated with significance ‘1’ DDIs those should be avoided from different prescriptions------------------------------59 Table 22. Significance ‘1’ potential DDIs those should be avoided from different physicians at same hospitals -----------------------------------------------------------------60 Table 23. Significance ‘1’ potential DDIs those should be dose adjustment from different hospitals -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------62 Table 24. Significance ‘1’ potential DDIs those need dose adjustment from different physicians at same hospitals----------------------------------------------------------------------------------65 Table 25. The top 10 of significance ‘2’ potential DDIs in the same prescription ----------------68 Table 26. The top 5 medications associated with significance ‘2’ potential DDIs in the same prescription ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------70 Table 27. The top 10 pairs of significance ‘2’ potential DDIs from different hospitals ---------71 Table 28. The top 5 medications associated with significance ‘2’ potential DDIs from different hospitals------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------73 Table 29. The top 10 pairs of significance ‘2’ potential DDIs from different physician in the same hospital -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------74 Table 30. The top 5 medications associated with significance ‘2’ potential DDIs from different physicians in the same hospital--------------------------------------------------------------76 Table 31. Analysis of admission incidence and potential DDIs in patients taking sulfonamide urea derivatives--------------------------------------------------------------------------------77 Figure Fig. 1. Procedures to estimate prevalence and incidence of potential DDIs in prescriptions---78 Appendix Appendix I. Cardiovascular drugs with Significance 1 of potential DDIs those should be avoided --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------79 Appendix II. Cardiovascular drugs with Significance 1 of potential DDIs those doses should be adjusted ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------83 Appendix III. The comparison of potential DDIs among cohort sampling databases of NHI (R01~R04)----------------------------------------------------------------------------------87 Appendix IV. ICD9 codes of hypertension-associated diagnoses-----------------------------------88 Appendix V. SAS-SQL program for DDIs selection from the same prescription----------------89 Appendix VI. SAS-SQL program for DDIs selection from the different prescriptions----------90 Appendix VII. ICD9 codes of hemorrhage-associated diagnoses-----------------------------------93 Appendix VIII. Previous publications VIII-1 Risk estimates for drugs suspected of being associated with Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis: a case-control study.---------------------94 VIII-2 Effect of antihypertensive drug dose frequency on clinic-home blood pressure difference in stage 1 treated hypertensives.---------------------------------------------97 VIII-3 Effects of low-dose treatment with felodipine versus fosinopril in Chinese patients with nonischemic heart failure and normal blood pressure: A double-blind, randomized, crossover study.------------------------------------------------------------105 | en |
dc.language | en-US | en |
dc.language.iso | en_US | - |
dc.subject | 高血壓 | zh_TW |
dc.subject | 潛在藥品交互作用 | en |
dc.subject | 盛行率 | en |
dc.subject | 發生率 | en |
dc.subject | hypertension | en |
dc.subject | potential DDIs | en |
dc.subject | prevalence | en |
dc.subject | incidence | en |
dc.title | 台灣高血壓病患潛在藥品交互作用之盛行率及臨床重要性 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Prevalence and clinical significance of potential drug-drug interactions in hypertensive patients in Taiwan | en |
dc.type | thesis | en |
dc.relation.reference | 1. Costa AJ. Potential drug interactions in an ambulatory geriatric population. Fam Pract 1991;8:234-6. 2. Mok H, Mulpeter K, O'Connor P, Feely J. Drug-drug interactions in hospital. Ir Med J 1991;84:26. 3. Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. Jama 1998;279:1200-5. 4. Pirmohamed M, James S, Meakin S et al. Adverse drug reactions as cause of admission to hospital: prospective analysis of 18 820 patients. Bmj 2004;329:15-9. 5. Moore N, Lecointre D, Noblet C, Mabille M. Frequency and cost of serious adverse drug reactions in a department of general medicine. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1998;45:301-8. 6. Juurlink DN, Mamdani M, Kopp A, Laupacis A, Redelmeier DA. Drug-drug interactions among elderly patients hospitalized for drug toxicity. Jama 2003;289:1652-8. 7. Colt HG, Shapiro AP. Drug-induced illness as a cause for admission to a community hospital. J Am Geriatr Soc 1989;37:323-6. 8. Levy M, Kewitz H, Altwein W, Hillebrand J, Eliakim M. Hospital admissions due to adverse drug reactions: a comparative study from Jerusalem and Berlin. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1980;17:25-31. 9. Levy M, Lipshitz M, Eliakim M. Hospital admissions due to adverse drug reactions. Am J Med Sci 1979;277:49-56. 10. Kelly WN. Potential risks and prevention, Part 1: Fatal adverse drug events. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2001;58:1317-24. 11. Kelly WN. Potential risks and prevention, Part 2: Drug-induced permanent disabilities. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2001;58:1325-9. 12. Marcellino K, Kelly WN. Potential risks and prevention, Part 3: Drug-induced threats to life. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2001;58:1399-405. 13. Kelly WN. Potential risks and prevention, Part 4: Reports of significant adverse drug events. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2001;58:1406-12. 14. Jankel CA, Fitterman LK. Epidemiology of drug-drug interactions as a cause of hospital admissions. Drug Saf 1993;9:51-9. 15. Pouyanne P, Haramburu F, Imbs JL, Begaud B. Admissions to hospital caused by adverse drug reactions: cross sectional incidence study. French Pharmacovigilance Centres. Bmj 2000;320:1036. 16. Moore TJ. The dangers of drugs. Prescription for disaster. The hidden dangers in your medicine cabinet. New York: Simon & Schuster; 1998:51. 17. Einarson TR. Drug-related hospital admissions. Ann Pharmacother 1993;27:832-40. 18. Merlo J, Liedholm H, Lindblad U et al. Prescriptions with potential drug interactions dispensed at Swedish pharmacies in January 1999: cross sectional study. Bmj 2001;323:427-8. 19. Kennedy DL GS, Lillie RB. Spontaneous Reporting in the United States. In: Strom BL, ed. Pharmacoepidemiology. 3 ed. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.; 2000:152. 20. Carter BL, Lund BC, Hayase N, Chrischilles E. The extent of potential antihypertensive drug interactions in a Medicaid population. Am J Hypertens 2002;15:953-7. 21. Field TS, Gurwitz JH, Avorn J et al. Risk factors for adverse drug events among nursing home residents. Arch Intern Med 2001;161:1629-34. 22. Routledge PA, O'Mahony MS, Woodhouse KW. Adverse drug reactions in elderly patients. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2004;57:121-6. 23. Cadieux RJ. Drug interactions in the elderly. How multiple drug use increases risk exponentially. Postgrad Med 1989;86:179-86. 24. Kohler GI, Bode-Boger SM, Busse R, Hoopmann M, Welte T, Boger RH. Drug-drug interactions in medical patients: effects of in-hospital treatment and relation to multiple drug use. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 2000;38:504-13. 25. Chrischilles EA, Segar ET, Wallace RB. Self-reported adverse drug reactions and related resource use. A study of community-dwelling persons 65 years of age and older. Ann Intern Med 1992;117:634-40. 26. Hanlon JT, Weinberger M, Samsa GP et al. A randomized, controlled trial of a clinical pharmacist intervention to improve inappropriate prescribing in elderly outpatients with polypharmacy. Am J Med 1996;100:428-37. 27. Delafuente JC. Understanding and preventing drug interactions in elderly patients. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2003;48:133-43. 28. Doucet J, Chassagne P, Trivalle C et al. Drug-drug interactions related to hospital admissions in older adults: a prospective study of 1000 patients. J Am Geriatr Soc 1996;44:944-8. 29. Hanlon JT, Schmader KE. Drug-drug interactions in older adults: which ones matter? Am J Geriatr Pharmacother 2005;3:61-3. 30. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR et al. Seventh report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Hypertension 2003;42:1206-52. 31. Whitworth JA. 2003 World Health Organization (WHO)/International Society of Hypertension (ISH) statement on management of hypertension. J Hypertens 2003;21:1983-92. 32. Fagard RH. Epidemiology of hypertension in the elderly. Am J Geriatr Cardiol 2002;11:23-8. 33. Pan WH, Chang HY, Yeh WT, Hsiao SY, Hung YT. Prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of hypertension in Taiwan: results of Nutrition and Health Survey in Taiwan (NAHSIT) 1993-1996. J Hum Hypertens 2001;15:793-8. 34. Lu FH, Tang SJ, Wu JS, Yang YC, Chang CJ. Hypertension in elderly persons: its prevalence and associated cardiovascular risk factors in Tainan City, southern Taiwan. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2000;55:M463-8. 35. Liau CS, Tseng YZ, Lee TK. Prevalence of cardiovascular diseases in elderly Chinese people in Taiwan. Int J Cardiol 1998;67:177-81. 36. Tseng WP. Epidemiology of hypertension among Chinese in Taiwan. J Hum Hypertens 1990;4:144-6. 37. Chou CC, Lee MS, Ke CH, Chung MH. Prescription patterns of hypertension --National Health Insurance in Taiwan. J Chin Med Assoc 2004;67:123-30. 38. Lindley CM, Tully MP, Paramsothy V, Tallis RC. Inappropriate medication is a major cause of adverse drug reactions in elderly patients. Age Ageing 1992;21:294-300. 39. Tamai IY, Strome LS, Marshall CE, Mooradian AD. Analysis of drug-drug interactions among nursing home residents. Am J Hosp Pharm 1989;46:1567-9. 40. Rosholm JU, Bjerrum L, Hallas J, Worm J, Gram LF. Polypharmacy and the risk of drug-drug interactions among Danish elderly. A prescription database study. Dan Med Bull 1998;45:210-3. 41. Bjorkman IK, Fastbom J, Schmidt IK, Bernsten CB. Drug-drug interactions in the elderly. Ann Pharmacother 2002;36:1675-81. 42. NMK. Kaplan's Clinical hypertension: Wolters Kluwer; 2002. 43. Flockhart DA, Tanus-Santos JE. Implications of cytochrome P450 interactions when prescribing medication for hypertension. Arch Intern Med 2002;162:405-12. 44. Katoh M, Nakajima M, Shimada N, Yamazaki H, Yokoi T. Inhibition of human cytochrome P450 enzymes by 1,4-dihydropyridine calcium antagonists: prediction of in vivo drug-drug interactions. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2000;55:843-52. 45. Anderson JR, Nawarskas JJ. Cardiovascular drug-drug interactions. Cardiol Clin 2001;19:215-34, v. 46. Po AL, Zhang WY. What lessons can be learnt from withdrawal of mibefradil from the market? Lancet 1998;351:1829-30. 47. Krayenbuhl JC, Vozeh S, Kondo-Oestreicher M, Dayer P. Drug-drug interactions of new active substances: mibefradil example. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1999;55:559-65. 48. Tatro DS. Drug interaction facts. 2002 ed. St. Louis: Facts and Comparisons; 2002. 49. Hansten P, Horn JR. The Top 100 Drug Interactions. A Guide to Patient Management. Edmonds: H & H Publications; 2002. 50. Voors AA, van Veldhuisen DJ. Pharmacological treatment of chronic heart failure according to the 2005 guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology. Minerva Cardioangiol 2005;53:233-9. 51. Carter BL, Lund BC, Hayase N, Chrischilles E. A longitudinal analysis of antihypertensive drug interactions in a Medicaid population. Am J Hypertens 2004;17:421-7. 52. Chan K. Pharmacoepidemiology. Formosan Journal of Medicine 1997;1:477-82. 53. Gardner JS PB, Stergachis A. Automated Databases in Pharmacoepidemiologic studies. In: Hartzema AG PM, Tilson HH, ed. Pharmacoepidemiology. Cincinnati: Harvey Whitney Books Company; 1998:368-388. 54. Methodology WcCfDS. Guidelines for ATC classification and DDD assignment. 5th ed. Oslo: WHO collaborating Center for Drug Statistics Methodology; 2002. 55. kao Yang YH KC, Hung HJ and Jia SW. Classification of Pharmaceutical Products Reimbursed by National Health Insurance by the ATC System. The Chinese Pharmaceutical Journal 2002;54:283-90. 56. Wysowski DK, Corken A, Gallo-Torres H, Talarico L, Rodriguez EM. Postmarketing reports of QT prolongation and ventricular arrhythmia in association with cisapride and Food and Drug Administration regulatory actions. Am J Gastroenterol 2001;96:1698-703. | en |
item.fulltext | no fulltext | - |
item.languageiso639-1 | en_US | - |
item.openairecristype | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_46ec | - |
item.cerifentitytype | Publications | - |
item.openairetype | thesis | - |
item.grantfulltext | none | - |
顯示於: | 流行病學與預防醫學研究所 |
在 IR 系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。