Utilization of digoxin and theophylline assays in the eastern province.

The utilization of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) for serum digoxin and theophylline was assessed with respect to the indication, time of sample collection and contribution to patient care. A total of 585 serum drug level determinations of digoxin (275) and theophylline (328) were done in a four month period. Reasons for requests were subtherapeutic response (27.5%), suspected toxicity (3.8%), baseline data (26.7%), patients at risk for toxicity (7.7%), and for the remaining 34.4% of orders, no reason was stated. The highest number of requests 246 (42.1%) were from the inpatient ward (INP), followed by emergency room (ER) 32.6%, outpatient department (OPD) 13% and intensive care unit (ICU) 12.3%. Repeated assays accounted for 363 determinations of which 55.9% had levels similar to the previous ones. In this study, we found a high incidence of inappropriateness in patient selection (34.4%), time of serum sample collection (28.4%), and dosage adjustment (46.8%). However, when these audit criteria were analyzed together, the overall appropriateness was as low as 33.5%. This indicated that serum drug monitoring was poorly utilized and did not contribute much to the patient's care. This results in an estimated financial loss per year (for inappropriate use of digoxin and theophylline levels) of about 37,344 Saudi Riyals (US $9,956.00). Corrective educational programs for the staff, based on standard guidelines for TDM, have been initiated and this study is a baseline for future prospective audits.

[1]  J. Stevenson,et al.  Therapeutic Drug Monitoring: Improved Performance Through Educational Intervention , 1990, Therapeutic drug monitoring.

[2]  D. Wing,et al.  The impact of a therapeutic drug monitoring program for phenytoin. , 1989, Therapeutic drug monitoring.

[3]  M. Levine,et al.  Evaluation of Serum Phenytoin Monitoring in an Acute Care Setting , 1988, Therapeutic drug monitoring.

[4]  R. Pleasants,et al.  Effect of data collection method on results of serum digoxin concentration audit. , 1988, American journal of hospital pharmacy.

[5]  M. Bonati,et al.  DIGOXIN SERUM REQUESTS , 1986, The Lancet.

[6]  M. Bonati,et al.  Is Ambulatory Therapeutic Digoxin Monitoring Useful? , 1985, Drug Intelligence & Clinical Pharmacy.

[7]  E. Garrard,et al.  Evaluation of Appropriateness and Interpretation of Serum Theophylline Assays , 1985, Drug intelligence & clinical pharmacy.

[8]  J. Horn,et al.  Evaluation of a Digoxin Pharmacokinetic Monitoring Service in a Community Hospital , 1985, Drug intelligence & clinical pharmacy.

[9]  S. G. Bryant,et al.  A Utilization Review of Theophylline Assays: Sampling Patterns and use , 1984, Drug intelligence & clinical pharmacy.

[10]  M. Melby,et al.  Collaborative clinical pharmacokinetics service in a community hospital. , 1984, American journal of hospital pharmacy.

[11]  S. G. Bryant,et al.  A utilization review of digoxin assays: sampling patterns and use. , 1984, Hospital pharmacy.

[12]  S. Carruthers,et al.  An audit of requests for therapeutic drug monitoring of digoxin: problems and pitfalls. , 1983, Therapeutic drug monitoring.

[13]  V. Gotz,et al.  Clinical Utilization of Serum Theophylline Concentrations in a University-Affiliated Hospital , 1982, Drug intelligence & clinical pharmacy.

[14]  T. D. Keith,et al.  Evaluation of the ordering of serum theophylline concentrations. , 1981, American journal of hospital pharmacy.

[15]  D. E. Miller,et al.  Establishing an aminoglycoside pharmacokinetic monitoring service in a community hospital. , 1981, American journal of hospital pharmacy.

[16]  P. Schneider,et al.  Appropriateness of the use of serum digoxin and digitoxin assays. , 1978, American journal of hospital pharmacy.

[17]  W. Barnes,et al.  Determination of serum gentamicin sulfate levels: ordering patterns and use as a guide to therapy. , 1976, Archives of internal medicine.