4.7 Article

Prevalence and Severity of Potential Drug-Drug Interactions in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis with and without Polypharmacy

Journal

PHARMACEUTICS
Volume 14, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics14030592

Keywords

multiple sclerosis; polypharmacy; drug-drug interactions; clinical decision support software; over-the-counter drugs; Rx drugs

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Polypharmacy is a common problem in modern medicine, especially among patients with chronic diseases such as multiple sclerosis. This study aimed to assess the prevalence and clinical relevance of polypharmacy and potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) in multiple sclerosis patients. The findings revealed that the majority of patients had polypharmacy and at least one pDDI.
Polypharmacy (PP) is a common problem in modern medicine, especially known to affect patients with chronic diseases such as multiple sclerosis (MS). With an increasing number of drugs taken, the risk of potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) is rising. This study aims to assess the prevalence and clinical relevance of polypharmacy and pDDIs in patients with MS. Pharmacological data of 627 patients with MS were entered into two drug-drug-interaction databases to determine the number and severity of pDDIs for each patient. The patients were divided into those with and without PP (total PP and prescription medication PP (Rx PP)). Of the 627 patients included, 53.3% and 38.6% had total PP and Rx PP, respectively. On average, every patient took 5.3 drugs. Of all patients, 63.8% had at least one pDDI with a mean of 4.6 pDDIs per patient. Less than 4% of all pDDIs were moderately severe or severe. Medication schedules should be checked for inappropriate medication and for possible interacting drugs to prevent pDDIs. Physicians as well as pharmacists should be more sensitive towards the relevance of pDDIs and know how they can be detected and avoided.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available