Clinical Pharmacology of the Dietary Supplement, Kratom ( Mitragyna speciosa )

Author(s):  
Chad Hartley ◽  
Marilyn Bulloch ◽  
Scott R. Penzak
2005 ◽  
Vol 77 (3) ◽  
pp. 113-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason D. Morrow ◽  
Timi I. Edeki ◽  
Mohamed El Mouelhi ◽  
Raymond E. Galinsky ◽  
Rose Kovelesky ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 104 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Risha I. Patel, PharmD ◽  
Robert D. Beckett, PharmD, BCPS

Objective: The research sought to evaluate seven drug information resources, specifically designed for analyzing drug interactions for scope, completeness, and ease of use, and determine the consistency of content among the seven resources.Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted where 100 drug-drug and drug-dietary supplement interactions were analyzed using 7 drug information resources: Lexicomp Interactions module, Micromedex Drug Interactions, Clinical Pharmacology Drug Interaction Report, Facts & Comparisons eAnswers, Stockley’s Drug Interactions (10th edition), Drug Interactions Analysis and Management (2014), and Drug Interaction Facts (2015). The interaction sample was developed based on published resources and peer input. Two independent reviewers gathered data for each interaction from each of the 7 resources using a common form.Results: Eighty-two drug-drug and 18 drug-dietary supplement interactions were analyzed. Scope scores were higher for Lexicomp Interactions (97.0%), Clinical Pharmacology Drug Interaction Report (97.0%), and Micromedex Drug Interactions (93.0%) compared to all other resources (p<0.05 for each comparison). Overall completeness scores were higher for Micromedex Drug Interactions (median 5, interquartile range [IQR] 4 to 5) compared to all other resources (p<0.01 for each comparison) and were higher for Lexicomp Interactions (median 4, IQR 4 to 5), Facts & Comparisons eAnswers (median 4, IQR 4 to 5), and Drug Interaction Facts (4, IQR 4 to 5) compared to all other resources, except Micromedex (p<0.05 for each comparison). Ease of use, in terms of time to locate information and time to gather information, was similar among resources. Consistency score was higher for Micromedex (69.9%) compared to all other resources (p<0.05 for each comparison).Conclusions: Clinical Pharmacology Drug Interaction Report, Lexicomp Interactions, and Micromedex Drug Interactions scored highest in scope. Micromedex Drug Interactions and Lexicomp Interactions scored highest in completeness. Consistency scores were overall low, but Micromedex Drug Interactions was the highest.


2018 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 2515690X1876484
Author(s):  
Ashley E. Montgomery ◽  
Robert D. Beckett ◽  
Kaitlin J. Montagano ◽  
Samah Kutom

Objective. To evaluate 6 tertiary, point-of-care drug information resources’ dietary supplement content. Methods. This was a cross-sectional evaluation of Lexicomp Natural Products Database, Micromedex Alternative Medicine, Clinical Pharmacology, Natural Medicines, The Review of Natural Products, and Handbook of Nonprescription Drugs. Each resource was evaluated for scope, completeness, consistency, and ease of use. Results. For a sample of 66 supplements, scope scores ranged from 69.7% (Micromedex) to 100% (Natural Medicines). Completeness scores were high considering uses, dose, adverse effects, and mechanism (85.7% to 100%). Overall completeness scores ranged from 82.5% ( Handbook of Nonprescription Drugs) to 100% (Clinical Pharmacology, Natural Medicines, The Review of Natural Products). Consistency scores ranged from 0% ( Handbook of Nonprescription Drugs) to 100% (Natural Medicines, The Review of Natural Products). Mean time to locate and gather information was similar among groups. Conclusions. Resources were similar for completeness and ease of use. Scope and consistency varied depending on the resource.


Anaesthesia ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 55 (9) ◽  
pp. 938-938
Author(s):  
K. R. Milligan

2001 ◽  
Vol 18 (Suppl. 23) ◽  
pp. 77-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. K. Mirakhur ◽  
K. C. McCourt

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document