The application of Global Trigger Tool in monitoring antineoplastic adverse drug events: a retrospective study

被引:0
|
作者
Liu, Yang [1 ]
Liu, Xianjun [1 ]
Xia, Binbin [1 ]
Chen, Jing [1 ]
Sun, Wenfang [1 ]
Liu, Fang [1 ]
Cheng, Hua [1 ]
机构
[1] Capital Med Univ, Beijing Luhe Hosp, Dept Pharm, Beijing, Peoples R China
来源
FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY | 2024年 / 14卷
关键词
adverse drug reactions/events; Global Trigger Tool (GTT); antineoplastic drugs; patient safety; risk factors; MANAGEMENT;
D O I
10.3389/fonc.2024.1230514
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objective This study aimed to establish an antineoplastic drugs trigger tool based on Global Trigger Tool (GTT), to examine the performance by detecting adverse drug events (ADEs) in patients with cancer in a Chinese hospital (a retrospective review), and to investigate the factors associating with the occurrence of antineoplastic ADEs. Methods Based on the triggers recommended by the GTT and those used in domestic and foreign studies and taking into account the scope of biochemical indexes in our hospital, some of them were adjusted. A total of 37 triggers were finally developed. Five hundred medical records of oncology patients discharged in our hospital from 1 June 2020 to 31 May 2021 were randomly selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. These records were reviewed retrospectively by antineoplastic drugs trigger tool. The sensitivity and specificity of the triggers were analyzed, as well as the characteristics and risk factors for the occurrence of ADEs. Results Thirty-three of the 37 triggers had positive trigger, and the sensitivity rate was 91.8% (459/500). For the specificity, the positive predictive value of overall ADEs was 46.0% (715/1556), the detection rate of ADEs was 63.0% (315/500), the rate of ADEs per 100 admissions was 136.0 (95% CI, 124.1-147.9), and the rate of ADEs per 1,000 patient days was 208.33 (95% CI, 201.2-215.5). The top three antineoplastic drugs related to ADEs were antimetabolic drugs (29.1%), plant sources and derivatives (27.1%), and metal platinum drugs (26.3%). The hematologic system was most frequently involved (507 cases, 74.6%), followed by gastrointestinal system (89 cases, 13.1%). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the number of combined drugs (OR = 1.14; 95% CI, 1.07-1.22; P < 0.001) and the previous history of adverse drug reaction (ADR) (OR = 0.38; 95% CI, 0.23-0.60; P < 0.001) were the risk factors for ADEs. The length of hospital stay (OR = 0.40; 95% CI, 0.14-1.12; P < 0.05) and the previous history of ADR (OR = 2.18; 95% CI, 1.07-4.45; P < 0.05) were the risk factors for serious adverse drug events (SAE). Conclusion The established trigger tool could be used to monitor antineoplastic drugs adverse events in patients with tumor effectively but still needs to be optimized. This study may provide some references for further research in order to improve the rationality and safety of antineoplastic medications.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Adverse Events at Baseline in a Chinese General Hospital: A Pilot Study of the Global Trigger Tool
    Xu, Xiao-Di
    Yuan, Yi-Jie
    Zhao, Li-Ming
    Li, Yang
    Zhang, Hui-Zhen
    Wu, Hua
    JOURNAL OF PATIENT SAFETY, 2020, 16 (04) : 269 - 273
  • [22] Describing adverse events in medical inpatients using the Global Trigger Tool
    Nicole, Grossmann
    Franziska, Gratwohl
    Sarah, Musy N.
    Natascha, Nielen M.
    Jacques, Donze
    Michael, Simon
    SWISS MEDICAL WEEKLY, 2019, 149
  • [23] Global Trigger Tool methodology to detect adverse events: pilot study at Academic Hospital of Udine
    Scarpis, E.
    Degan, S.
    De Corti, D.
    Mellace, F.
    Cocconi, R.
    Farneti, F.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2020, 30
  • [24] EFFECTIVENESS OF TRIGGER TOOLS TO DETECT ADVERSE DRUG EVENTS FROM DISCHARGE SUMMARIES: A RETROSPECTIVE STUDY
    Anburaj, E.
    Vilakkathala, R.
    Mallayasamy, S.
    Stanley, W.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2016, 19 (07) : A823 - A823
  • [25] Evaluation of accuracy of IHI Trigger Tool in identifying adverse drug events: a prospective observational study
    Graciano Silva, Maria das Dores
    Parreiras Martins, Maria Auxiliadora
    Viana, Luciana de Gouvea
    Passaglia, Luiz Guilherme
    de Menezes, Renata Rezende
    de Queiroz Oliveira, Joao Antonio
    Padilha da Silva, Jose Luiz
    Pinho Ribeiro, Antonio Luiz
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2018, 84 (10) : 2252 - 2259
  • [26] Adverse events in prehospital emergency care: a trigger tool study
    Magnus Andersson Hagiwara
    Carl Magnusson
    Johan Herlitz
    Elin Seffel
    Christer Axelsson
    Monica Munters
    Anneli Strömsöe
    Lena Nilsson
    BMC Emergency Medicine, 19
  • [27] Adverse events in prehospital emergency care: a trigger tool study
    Hagiwara, Magnus Andersson
    Magnusson, Carl
    Herlitz, Johan
    Seffel, Elin
    Axelsson, Christer
    Munters, Monica
    Stromsoe, Anneli
    Nilsson, Lena
    BMC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2019, 19 (1)
  • [28] Identifying adverse events in hospitalized patients using global trigger tool in Thailand
    Asavaroengchai, Santawat
    Sriratanaban, Jiruth
    Hiransuthikul, Narin
    Supachutikul, Anuwat
    ASIAN BIOMEDICINE, 2009, 3 (05) : 545 - 550
  • [29] Measuring Adverse Events and Levels of Harm in Pediatric Inpatients With the Global Trigger Tool
    Kirkendall, Eric S.
    Kloppenborg, Elizabeth
    Papp, James
    White, Denise
    Frese, Carol
    Hacker, Deborah
    Schoettker, Pamela J.
    Muething, Stephen
    Kotagal, Uma
    PEDIATRICS, 2012, 130 (05) : E1206 - E1214
  • [30] Trigger Tools for Adverse Drug Events: Useful Addition to the Quality Tool Box
    Todi, Subhash
    Saha, Ananya
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2020, 24 (03) : 151 - 152