Drug use in pregnancy: an overview of epidemiological (drug utilization) studies

1990 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-328 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Bonati ◽  
R. Bortolus ◽  
F. Marchetti ◽  
M. Romero ◽  
G. Tognoni
Author(s):  
Asma Al-Turkait ◽  
Lisa Szatkowski ◽  
Imti Choonara ◽  
Shalini Ojha

Rational prescribing is challenging in neonatology. Drug utilization studies help identify and define the problem. We performed a review of the literature on drug use in neonatal units and describe global variations. We searched databases (EMBASE, CINAHL and Medline) from inception to July 2020, screened studies and extracted relevant data (two reviewers). The search revealed 573 studies of which 84 were included. India (n = 14) and the USA (n = 13) reported the most. Data collection was prospective (n = 56) and retrospective (n = 26), mostly (n = 52) from one center only. Sixty studies described general drug use in 34 to 450,386 infants (median (IQR) 190 (91–767)) over a median (IQR) of 6 (3–18) months. Of the participants, 20–87% were preterm. The mean number of drugs per infant (range 11.1 to 1.7, pooled mean (SD) 4 (2.4)) was high with some reporting very high burden (≥30 drugs per infant in 8 studies). This was not associated with the proportion of preterm infants included. Antibiotics were the most frequently used drug. Drug use patterns were generally uniform with some variation in antibiotic use and more use of phenobarbitone in Asia. This study provides a global perspective on drug utilization in neonates and highlights the need for better quality information to assess rational prescribing.


2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 324-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cassia Garcia Moraes ◽  
Sotero Serrate Mengue ◽  
Tatiane da Silva Dal Pizzol

ABSTRACT: Objective: To assess the agreement between three recall periods for self-reported drug use using a 24-hour recall period as reference. Methods: Participants were allocated into three groups with different recall periods of 7, 14 and 30 days and were interviewed at two different times. A 24-hour recall questionnaire was answered during the first interview, and a questionnaire on drug use over the different recall periods tested was answered during the second interview. The agreement between the questionnaires was evaluated using percent agreement and kappa. Results: For continuous drugs, percent agreement varied between 92 and 99% and kappa varied between 0.71 and 0.97 for three periods tested. For drugs of occasional use, percent agreement varied between 63 and 81% and kappa varied between 0.27 and 0.52. The prevalence of drugs, particularly those of occasional use, increases with time. Conclusions: The high level of agreement between the three recall periods suggests that all of them are valid for the investigation of drugs of continuous use.


1993 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 171-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lolkje Jong-Van den Berg

1983 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 547-551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bob Power ◽  
Winanne Downey ◽  
Bruce R. Schnell

Psychotropic drug use in Saskatchewan during 1977, 1978, 1979 and 1980 was determined. Approximately one in five prescriptions dispensed was for a psychotropic. About 20% of the population received psychotropic drugs in each year but use has declined slightly, especially that of tranquilizers. Psychotropic use increased with the patient's age and nearly two-thirds were women. Considerable caution should be exercised in making comparisons with other drug utilization studies. There may be substantial differences in the drugs selected for study, the categorization of these drugs, and the methodology used to analyze drug use. Also, most studies are based on data that is from a decade old or older. Moreover, most if not all other studies on drug use are based on sample surveys (from different sampling universes), whereas the present study is based on the entire population. Nevertheless, some generalizations may be valid. Since non-formulary drugs are excluded, the findings should be regarded as conservative. Examples of non-formulary drugs considered to be psychotropic include antispasmodic / tranquilizer / sedative combinations (example: Librax, Donnatal), combination hypnotics (example: Tuinal, Mandrax), and some combination analgesics (example: propoxyphene compounds, pentazocine compound, oxycodone compound).


Author(s):  
Shalini S ◽  
Ravichandran V ◽  
Saraswathi R ◽  
BK Mohanty ◽  
Dhanaraj S K

 Aspire of the Drug Utilization Studies (DUS) is to appraise factors related to the prescribing, dispensing, administering and taking of medication, and it’s associated. Since the middle of twentieth century, interest in DUS has been escalating, first for market-only purposes, then for appraising the quality of medical prescription and comparing patterns of use of specific drugs. The scope of DUS is to evaluate the current state and future trends of drug usage, to estimate roughly disease pervasiveness, drug expenditures, aptness of prescriptions and adherence to evidence-based recommendations. The increasing magnitude of DUS as a valuable investigation resource in pharmacoepidemiology has been bridging it with other health allied areas, such as public health, rational use of drug, evidence based drug use, pharmacovigilance, pharmacoeconomics, eco-pharmacovigilance and pharmacogenetics.


DICP ◽  
1990 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-86
Author(s):  
William F. Mcghan ◽  
J. Lyle Bootman ◽  
Raymond J. Townsend ◽  
Morton P. Goldman

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document