Profile of drug interactions in hospitalized children

  • Jacqueline K. Martinbiancho
  • Joice Zuckermann
  • Luciana dos Santos
  • Marianne M. Silva
Keywords: Drug Interactions, Inpatients, Pharmacists, Brazil


Introduction: The expected therapeutic response may be affected by the presence of drug interactions. With the high number of reports on new drug interactions, it has been difficult for health professionals to keep constantly updated. For this reason, computer systems have helped identify such interactions.

Objectives: To verify the rate and profile of drug interactions in medical prescriptions to hospitalized pediatric patients.

Methods: A descriptive study investigated prescriptions to hospitalized pediatric patients. The study included patients between 0 and 12 years old, containing 4 or more drugs in their prescriptions. The analysis of interaction and incompatibility possibilities in prescribed drugs used Micromedex / Drug-Reax® program.

Results: From 2005 to 2006, 3,170 patients were investigated, and 11,181 prescriptions were analyzed, a mean value of 3.5 prescriptions/patient. In total, 6,857 drug interactions were found, which corresponds to 1.9 interaction/prescription. Among them, relevance to ampicillin and gentamicin, found in 220 (3.2%) prescriptions. In total, 2,411 drug incompatibilities in via y were found, a mean value of 0.5/prescription, with emphasis on vancomycin and cefepime, found in 243 (10.0%) prescriptions.

Conclusion: The presence of drug interactions is a permanent risk in hospitals. This way, the utilization of computer programs, pharmacotherapy monitoring of patients and the pharmacist presence in the multidisciplinary team are some manners of contributing to hospitalized patients’ treatment.


Download data is not yet available.


1. Cruciol-Souza JM, Thomson JC. A pharmacoepidemiologic study of drug interactions in a Brazilian teaching hospital. Clinics 2006; 61(6): 515-20.

2. Hohl CM, Dankoff J, Colacone A, Afilalo M.Polypharmacy, adverse drug-related events, and potential adverse drug interactions in elderly patients presenting to an emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 2001;38(6):666-71.

3 Tatro DS. Drug Interaction Facts. St. Louis: Facts & Comparisons; 2006.

4 Sehn R, Camargo AL, Heineck I, Ferreira MBC. Interações medicamentosas potenciais em prescrições de pacientes hospitalizados. Infarma 2003; 15(9/10): 77-81.

5 Castro CGS, Teixeira CC. In “Interações Medicamentosas”. Fuchs FD, Wannmacher L, Ferreira MB. Farmacologia Clínica – Fundamentos da Terapêutica Racional. 3ªed. Rio de Janeiro: Guanabara Koogan, 2006. p.67-72.

6 Lisboa SML. In “Interações e Incompatibilidades Medicamentosas”. Gomes MJVM, Reis AMM. Ciências Farmacêuticas – Uma Abordagem em Farmácia Hospitalar. 1 ed. São Paulo: Atheneu, 2000. p.147-62Guanabara Koogan, 2000. p.147-62.

7 Novaes MRC, Gomes KLG. Estudo de utilização de medicamentos em pacientes pediátricos. Infarma 2006; 18(7/8): 18-20.

8 Malone DC, Hutchins DS, Haupert H, Hansten P, Duncan B, Van Bergen RC, Solomon SL, Lipton RB. Assessment of potential drug-drug interactions with a prescription claims database. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2005;62(19):1983-91.

9 Becker ML, Kallewaard M, Caspers PW, Schalekamp T, Stricker BH. Potential determinants of drug-drug interaction associated dispensing in community pharmacies. Drug Saf. 2005; 28(5): 371-8.

10 Mendes BG, Meiners MMMA. Prescrição de Medicamentos para Crianças Hospitalizadas: Como Avaliar a Qualidade? Rev Ass Med Brasil. 2001; 47(4): 332-7.

11 Abarca J, Colon LR, Wang VS, Malone DC, Murphy JE, Armstrong EP. Evaluation of the performance of drug-drug interaction screening software in community and hospital pharmacies. J Manag Care Pharm. 2006: 12(5): 383-9.

12 Perucca E. Clinically relevant drug interactions with antiepileptic drugs. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2005; 61(3): 246-55.

13 Riva R, Albani F, Contin M, Baruzzi A. Pharmacokinetic interactions between antiepileptic drug-clinical considerations. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1996; 31(6): 470-93.

14 Trissel LA. Handbook on Injectable Drugs. 13ªed. Bethesda (MD): ASHP, 2005. p. 1446-59.
Original Research