A pilot study to compare natural health product–drug interactions in two databases in Canada

Faubert, Guillaume; Lebel, Denis; Bussières, Jean-François

doi:10.1007/s11096-010-9364-2

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…17 Had other sources of information on interactions been used, they might have led to different numbers of interactions, or categories, since there is a lack of consistency in the inclusion and grading of interactions between different databases and studies. [27][28][29]…”

Section: Study Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Absence of ‘over‐the‐counter’ medicinal products in on‐line prescription records: a risk factor of overlooking interactions in the elderly

Olesen

Harbig

Barat

et al. 2012

Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The absence of information on OTC products in an on-line prescription record entails a risk of overlooking interactions in elderly patients. Such products should be included in on-line medication records to prevent adverse effects from interactions. However, online medication records are not available in all countries and as inclusion of data on OTC drugs seem not to be feasible presently. Still, it is highly recommended that the patient's drug list is reviewed on a regular basis.

show abstract

Section: Study Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Absence of ‘over‐the‐counter’ medicinal products in on‐line prescription records: a risk factor of overlooking interactions in the elderly

Olesen

Harbig

Barat

et al. 2012

Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of these 41 articles, 20 articles were eliminated because they developed or referenced (1) other eHealth technologies that were not web-based online resources (n = 13), or (2) online resources that were entirely mobile-based, predominantly biochemistry focused or unavailable (n = 7). Thus, a total of 21 articles were found to be eligible and included in the present study [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37]. A PRISMA diagram is provided in Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Web-based online resources about adverse interactions or side effects associated with complementary and alternative medicine: a systematic review, summarization and quality assessment

Munford

Thakar

2020

BMC Med Inform Decis Mak

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Given an increased global prevalence of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use, healthcare providers commonly seek CAM-related health information online. Numerous online resources containing CAM-specific information exist, many of which are readily available/accessible, containing information shareable with their patients. To the authors’ knowledge, no study has summarized nor assessed the quality of content contained within these online resources for at least a decade, specifically pertaining to information about adverse effects or interactions. Methods This study provides summaries of web-based online resources that provide safety information on potential interactions or adverse effects of CAM. Specifically, clinicians are the intended users of these online resources containing patient information which they can then disseminate to their patients. All online resources were assessed for content quality using the validated rating tool, DISCERN. Results Of 21 articles identified in our previously published scoping review, 23 online resources were eligible. DISCERN assessments suggests that online resources containing CAM-specific information vary in quality. Summed DISCERN scores had a mean of 56.13 (SD = 10.25) out of 75. Online resources with the highest total DISCERN scores across all questions included Micromedex (68.50), Merck Manual (67.50) and Drugs.com (66.50). Online resources with the lowest total scores included Drug Information (33.00), Caremark Drug Interactions (42.50) and HIV Drug Interactions (43.00). The DISCERN questions that received the highest mean score across all online resources referred to whether the risks were described for each treatment (4.66), whether the aims were clear (4.58), whether the source achieved those aims (4.58), and whether the website referred to areas of uncertainty (4.58). The DISCERN questions that received the lowest mean score across all online resources assessed whether there was discussion about no treatment being used (1.29) and how treatment choices would affect quality of life (2.00). Conclusion This study provides a comprehensive list of online resources containing CAM-specific information. Informed by the appraisal of these resources, this study provides a summarized list of high quality, evidence-based, online resources about CAM and CAM-related adverse effects. This list of recommended resources can thereby serve as a useful reference for clinicians, researchers, and patients.

show abstract

“…28 Faubert et al found that the NMCD and the Natural Standard Database identified a similar number of potential medication-DS interactions. 29 SIO guidelines acknowledge that only a few complementary therapies have been evaluated with randomized controlled clinical trials. This has left a knowledge gap between the currently available scientific evidence and the information needed to provide evidence-based advice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Pilot Study of Website Information Regarding Aromatase Inhibitors: Dietary Supplement Interactions

McDermott

Hsieh

Sweet

et al. 2011

The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Patients who have hormone receptor-positive breast cancer and who are taking aromatase inhibitors (AIs) should understand the benefits and risks of concomitant dietary supplement (DS) use. The International Society for Integrative Oncology (SIO) encourages patients to discuss DS use with their health care practitioners. The objective was to conduct a pilot study rating Internet websites from the perspective of health care practitioners for information about AI-DS interactions. Design: Five (5) Internet websites suggested by SIO were evaluated using the DISCERN instrument rating tool. The available AI-DS information on these websites was rated by 4 evaluators: 2 naturopathic doctors, 1 oncology pharmacy resident, and a pharmacy student. Results: The overall rankings ranged from 1.6 to 3.9, with considerable variability in the type of information available from the websites. The interevaluator rankings of the websites ranged from 0.44 to 0.89. The evaluators consistently found the most reliable, unbiased, and comprehensive information on AI-DS interactions at the Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database and Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center websites. However, more than one database was needed for provision of optimal patient information on AI-DS interactions. Conclusions: In order to effectively advise patients regarding AI-DS interactions, more than one website should be evaluated to assess the potential efficacy and safety of DS in women whose breast cancer is being treated with an AI.

show abstract

A pilot study to compare natural health product–drug interactions in two databases in Canada

Cited by 6 publications

References 23 publications

Absence of ‘over‐the‐counter’ medicinal products in on‐line prescription records: a risk factor of overlooking interactions in the elderly

Absence of ‘over‐the‐counter’ medicinal products in on‐line prescription records: a risk factor of overlooking interactions in the elderly

Web-based online resources about adverse interactions or side effects associated with complementary and alternative medicine: a systematic review, summarization and quality assessment

A Pilot Study of Website Information Regarding Aromatase Inhibitors: Dietary Supplement Interactions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About