No abstract

BackgroundWarfarin is known for its interaction with many drugs, resulting in undesired treatment outcomes such as bleeding. The study aimed to assess the prevalence of drug-drug interactions and determinants of bleeding among inpatients on warfarin therapy.MethodsA cohort of inpatients on warfarin treatment was prospectively followed from date of admission until discharge. The study was carried out from January to October 2013 in Ayder Referral Hospital, Northern Ethiopia. Patients on warfarin therapy during the study period and willing to participate were included as study subjects. Each concurrent medication was collected and checked for drug-drug interactions using Micromedex® online drug reference. Data were analyzed using statistical software, SPSS for windows version 16. The relationship between bleeding complications and independent variables (age, sex, residence, type and number of co-medications, dose and duration of warfarin treatment, INR value) was assessed using binary logistic regression analysis (Odds ratio, 95% confidence interval).ResultsOf the total 133 patients enrolled in the study, 78 (58.9%) were females. The mean age of the study participants was 40.81 ± 17.6 years. The prevalence of drug-drug interactions was 99.2%. Among these, 65 (49.2%) patients had at least one major while the others had moderate level of drug-drug interaction. Twenty two (16.5%) patients have developed bleeding complications. Increase in international normalized ratio value was found to be strongly associated with risk of bleeding (P value = 0.00; OR = 0.03 (0.00-0.46)).ConclusionDrug-drug interactions with warfarin were prevalent in the study hospital. Bleeding complications due to warfarin were also high. Thus, clinicians should be aware of potential interactions and monitor patients’ international normalized ratio closely.

BackgroundThe elderly are considered as special population, as they differ from younger adults in terms of comorbidity, polypharmacy, pharmacokinetics, vulnerability to drug–drug interactions and adverse drug reactions. Despite the fact that the elderly patients are at high risk of having drug interaction and potential adverse outcomes, studies in this regard are scarce in resource limited settings like Ethiopia. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and determinants of potential drug–drug interaction in elderly patients admitted to medical ward of Ayder Referral Hospital in Northern Ethiopia.MethodsA cross sectional study was conducted among elderly inpatients aged 60 years and above. The study was conducted from February to May 2014. Prescribed drugs being taken concurrently for at least 24 h were included and checked for drug–drug interaction using Micromedex® 2.0 online drug reference. Data were analyzed using statistical software, statistical package for social sciences for windows version 20. Logistic regression model was used to analyze factors associated with occurrence of drug interaction. P value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsA total of 140 patients were participated in the study. The mean age (±standard deviation) of participants was 68 (±7) years. Majority (61.4 %) of patients were diagnosed with cardiovascular and/or renal diseases. A total of 814 drugs were prescribed with a mean of 6 (±4) medications per patient during a 13 (±9) days of hospital stay. About two-third (62.2 %) of the respondents were exposed to at least one potential drug–drug interaction. Among these 3.6, 32.9 and 25.7 % of patients had taken contraindicated drug combination, at least one major and at least one moderate drug–drug interaction, respectively. Patients with five or more prescribed medications were four times at risk of having drug–drug interaction (P = 0.00; adjusted odds ratio 4.047; 95 % confidence interval 1.867–8.775).ConclusionDrug–drug interaction in elderly patients was common in this resource limited set-up. Awareness creation and clinical pharmacist involvement in minimizing the risk associated with potentially harmful drug combinations are needed.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13104-016-2238-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundIsoniazid preventive therapy is a key public health intervention for the prevention of tuberculosis disease among people living with HIV. Despite the confirmed efficacy of isoniazid preventive therapy and global recommendations existing for decades, its implementation remains limited. In resource constrained settings, few have investigated why isoniazid preventive therapy is not implemented on full scale. This study was designed to investigate the level of isoniazid preventive therapy implementation and reasons for suboptimal implementation in Tigray region of Ethiopia.MethodsA review of patient records combined with a qualitative study using in-depth interviews and focus group discussions was conducted in 11 hospitals providing isoniazid preventive therapy in the Tigray Region. The study participants were health providers working in the HIV clinics of the 11 hospitals in the province. Health providers were interviewed about their experience of providing isoniazid preventive therapy and challenges faced during its implementation. All conversations were audio-recorded. Record review of 16,443 HIV patients registered for care in these hospitals between September 2011 and April 2014 was done to determine isoniazid preventive therapy utilization. Data were collected from April to August 2014.ResultsFifty health providers participated in the study. Overall isoniazid preventive therapy coverage of the region was estimated to be 20 %. Isoniazid stock out, fear of creating isoniazid resistance, problems in patient acceptance, and lack of commitment of health managers to scale up the program were indicated by health providers as the main barriers hindering implementation of isoniazid preventive therapy.ConclusionImplementation of isoniazid preventive therapy in Tigray region of Ethiopia had low coverage. Frequent interruption of isoniazid supplies raises the concern of interrupted therapy resulting in creation of isoniazid resistance. Health managers, drug suppliers and partners working in HIV and tuberculosis programs should be committed to ensure an uninterrupted supply of isoniazid and full scale implementation of isoniazid preventive therapy to eligible people living with HIV.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-016-3525-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract