↓ Skip to main content

Important drug classes associated with potential drug–drug interactions in critically ill patients: highlights for cardiothoracic intensivists

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
Title
Important drug classes associated with potential drug–drug interactions in critically ill patients: highlights for cardiothoracic intensivists
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13613-015-0086-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shadi Baniasadi, Behrooz Farzanegan, Maryam Alehashem

Abstract

Patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) are more prone to drug-drug interactions (DDIs). The software and charts that indicate all interactions may not be proper for clinical usage. This study aimed to identify the main drug classes associated with clinically significant DDIs in cardiothoracic ICU and categorize DDIs to make cardiothoracic intensivists aware of safe medication usage. This prospective study was conducted over 6 months in a cardiothoracic ICU of a university-affiliated teaching hospital. The presence of potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) was assessed by a clinical pharmacologist using Lexi-Interact database. Clinically significant pDDIs were defined according to severity and reliability rating. Interacting drug classes, mechanisms, and recommendations were identified for each interaction. From 1780 administered drugs, 496 lead to major (D) and contraindicated (X) interactions. Nine drug classes were responsible for D and/or X interactions with excellent (E) and/or good (G) reliability. Anti-infective agents (45.87 %) were the main drug classes that caused clinically significant pDDIs followed by central nervous system drugs (14.67 %). Azole antifungals as the most interacting antimicrobial agents precipitated metabolism inhibition of CYP3A substrates. Clinically significant pDDIs as potential patient safety risks were prevalent in critically ill patients. The findings from current study help to improve knowledge and awareness of clinicians in this area and minimize adverse events due to pDDIs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 19%
Student > Master 10 15%
Researcher 7 10%
Other 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 21 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 25%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 14 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 21 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 December 2015.
All research outputs
#17,777,370
of 22,833,393 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#882
of 1,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#262,522
of 386,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#21
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,833,393 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,043 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.7. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 386,693 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.