A clinical evaluation of the Janus Web Application, a software screening tool for drug-drug interactions

PurposeTo evaluate the clinical relevance of the Janus Web Application (JWA) in screening for potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs).MethodsOne hundred and fifty patients taking two drugs or more were studied. Potential DDIs were identified by the JWA. Interviewing the patient and looking into his/her medical records provided complementing information. A clinical pharmacologist judged which potential DDIs were clinically relevant. Potentially relevant DDIs identified by the JWA were then correlated with clinically relevant DDIs.ResultsA total of 150 significant potential DDIs were found. Sixteen percent (24/150) were judged to be clinically relevant.ConclusionsA very small proportion of DDIs was considered clinically relevant in the specific clinical context. To optimise the software’s user-friendliness, the following points need to be considered: the possibility of eliminating trivial potential DDIs, individualising drug alerts, and providing written information, accessible via a hyperlink.

[1]  Robyn Tamblyn,et al.  Reasons for Physician Non-Adherence to Electronic Drug Alerts , 2004, MedInfo.

[2]  C. Bahr,et al.  Drug-related problems and pharmacotherapeutic advisory intervention at a medicine clinic , 2006, European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology.

[3]  Cockcroft Dw,et al.  Prediction of Creatinine Clearance from Serum Creatinine , 1976 .

[4]  Marc Berg,et al.  Viewpoint Paper: Some Unintended Consequences of Information Technology in Health Care: The Nature of Patient Care Information System-related Errors , 2003, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[5]  A. Avery,et al.  GPs' views on computerized drug interaction alerts: questionnaire survey , 2002, Journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics.

[6]  Robert P. Spena,et al.  Computer use and needs of internists: a survey of members of the American College of Physicians-American Society of Internal Medicine , 2000, AMIA.

[7]  F. Ruddle,et al.  Report of the committee on the genetic constitution of autosomes other than chromosomes 1,2 and 6. , 1976, Birth defects original article series.

[8]  Peter Forsberg,et al.  Janus computerised prescribing system provides pharmacological knowledge at point of care – design, development and proof of concept , 2006, European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology.

[9]  Bruce Kaplan,et al.  Evaluation of Drug Interaction Software to Identify Alerts for Transplant Medications , 2005, The Annals of pharmacotherapy.

[10]  C. A. Jankel,et al.  Epidemiology of Drug-Drug Interactions as a Cause of Hospital Admissions , 1993, Drug safety.

[11]  D. Bates,et al.  Effect of computerized physician order entry and a team intervention on prevention of serious medication errors. , 1998, JAMA.

[12]  P. Glassman,et al.  Improving Recognition of Drug Interactions: Benefits and Barriers to Using Automated Drug Alerts , 2002, Medical care.

[13]  T K Hazlet,et al.  Performance of community pharmacy drug interaction software. , 2001, Journal of the American Pharmaceutical Association.

[14]  The perils of CPOE , 2004, The Lancet.

[15]  J. P. Kichak,et al.  Computerized physician order entry: helpful or harmful? , 2003, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[16]  R. Haynes,et al.  Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on physician performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. , 1998, JAMA.

[17]  G. Peterson,et al.  Drug‐related admissions to an Australian hospital , 1994, Journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics.

[18]  D. Bates,et al.  Effects of computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support systems on medication safety: a systematic review. , 2003, Archives of internal medicine.