Evaluation of Appropriate Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors in Non-critically Ill Patients in Tertiary Medical Center: A Retrospective Study.

IF 1.1 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Abdulhamid Althagafi, Nesereen Magbool, Hatoon Altayib, Tala Bukhari, Nawal Melibari, Foud Bahamdain, Khalid Eljaaly
{"title":"Evaluation of Appropriate Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors in Non-critically Ill Patients in Tertiary Medical Center: A Retrospective Study.","authors":"Abdulhamid Althagafi, Nesereen Magbool, Hatoon Altayib, Tala Bukhari, Nawal Melibari, Foud Bahamdain, Khalid Eljaaly","doi":"10.2174/0115748863284762240129092556","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There are concerns about indiscriminate prescriptions and the inappropriate use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) without any clear indications, especially among noncritically hospitalized patients.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to characterize PPI prescriptions among non-critically hospitalized patients in a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at the King Abdulaziz University Hospital between June and August 2021. The data of adult patients who received PPIs on hospital admission in the medical and surgical wards were collected and analyzed for appropriateness based on the current international guidelines and recommendations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 174 patient records were included in this study. The proportion of patients with appropriate and inappropriate PPI prescriptions was 67.24% (n=117) and 32.76% (n=57), respectively. Female patients (risk=50.00%, 95% CI: 36.89-63.11, p<0.001) were more likely to receive an inappropriate PPI prescription than their male counterparts (risk=33.33%, 95% CI: 24.56-43.43, p<0.001). Intravenous omeprazole 40 mg once daily was the most frequently prescribed PPI (n=62). The hospital length of stay differed significantly between the groups of patients who received appropriate and inappropriate PPIs (24.56 ± 47.14 vs. 13.50 ± 13.84; t=2.34, 95% CI: 1.72-20.4; p=0.02). However, there was no significant difference in the total therapy duration in both the groups (3.76 ± 2.50 vs. 4.75 ± 3.32, t=-1.62, 95%CI: -1.79-0.17; p=0.11).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings show a high trend of inappropriate PPI prescriptions. Hence, educational programs are recommended to encourage healthcare professionals to stick to the approved guidelines when prescribing PPIs.</p>","PeriodicalId":10777,"journal":{"name":"Current drug safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current drug safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/0115748863284762240129092556","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There are concerns about indiscriminate prescriptions and the inappropriate use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) without any clear indications, especially among noncritically hospitalized patients.

Objective: This study aimed to characterize PPI prescriptions among non-critically hospitalized patients in a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia.

Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at the King Abdulaziz University Hospital between June and August 2021. The data of adult patients who received PPIs on hospital admission in the medical and surgical wards were collected and analyzed for appropriateness based on the current international guidelines and recommendations.

Results: A total of 174 patient records were included in this study. The proportion of patients with appropriate and inappropriate PPI prescriptions was 67.24% (n=117) and 32.76% (n=57), respectively. Female patients (risk=50.00%, 95% CI: 36.89-63.11, p<0.001) were more likely to receive an inappropriate PPI prescription than their male counterparts (risk=33.33%, 95% CI: 24.56-43.43, p<0.001). Intravenous omeprazole 40 mg once daily was the most frequently prescribed PPI (n=62). The hospital length of stay differed significantly between the groups of patients who received appropriate and inappropriate PPIs (24.56 ± 47.14 vs. 13.50 ± 13.84; t=2.34, 95% CI: 1.72-20.4; p=0.02). However, there was no significant difference in the total therapy duration in both the groups (3.76 ± 2.50 vs. 4.75 ± 3.32, t=-1.62, 95%CI: -1.79-0.17; p=0.11).

Conclusion: The findings show a high trend of inappropriate PPI prescriptions. Hence, educational programs are recommended to encourage healthcare professionals to stick to the approved guidelines when prescribing PPIs.

对三级医疗中心非危重病人适当使用质子泵抑制剂的评估:一项回顾性研究。
背景:质子泵抑制剂质子泵抑制剂(PPI)在没有明确适应症的情况下被滥用和使用不当,尤其是在非重症住院患者中,这一点令人担忧:本研究旨在了解沙特阿拉伯一家三甲医院非重症住院患者的 PPI 处方特点:方法:2021 年 6 月至 8 月期间,在阿卜杜勒-阿齐兹国王大学医院开展了一项回顾性横断面研究。收集了内科和外科病房入院时接受 PPIs 治疗的成年患者的数据,并根据当前的国际指南和建议分析了这些药物的适当性:本研究共纳入了 174 份病历。开具适当和不适当 PPI 处方的患者比例分别为 67.24%(n=117)和 32.76%(n=57)。女性患者(风险=50.00%,95% CI:36.89-63.11,p结论:研究结果表明,不适当的 PPI 处方呈高发趋势。因此,建议开展教育计划,鼓励医护人员在开具 PPIs 处方时遵守已获批准的指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Current drug safety
Current drug safety PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
112
期刊介绍: Current Drug Safety publishes frontier articles on all the latest advances on drug safety. The journal aims to publish the highest quality research articles, reviews and case reports in the field. Topics covered include: adverse effects of individual drugs and drug classes, management of adverse effects, pharmacovigilance and pharmacoepidemiology of new and existing drugs, post-marketing surveillance. The journal is essential reading for all researchers and clinicians involved in drug safety.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信