การเปรียบเทียบวิธีการติดตามอาการอันไม่พึงประสงค์จากยาโดยวิธีติดตามคำสั่งเตือนภัยและวิธีติดตามเชิงลึกที่หอผู้ป่วยอายุรศาสตร์ โรงพยาบาลจุฬาลงกรณ์ / สายฝน อินทร์ใจเอื้อ = Comparing adverse drug reaction monitoring system between alerting order system and intensive monitoring system in medical wards, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital / Saifon Indrachai-ea
The objective of this research was to study adverse drug reactions (ADRs) by comparing two pharmacist-based ADR monitoring methods. The first method was the alerting order system which expected ADR were detected by screening physician's orders including drug discontinuation, dosage decreasing, laboratory test ordering and order for "antidote" or "tracer agent" that used to treat ADRs. The second method was the intensive monitoring system which suspected ADRs were detected by reviewing patient's chart, patient interviewing, screening laborary test parameters as well as changes in medication orders. The study was performed during October 2000 to February 2001 at the medical wards, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital. Four hundred and thirty-three pateints were monitored, mean age was 51.9 years (+-17.9), number of medication used were 8.5 items (+-5.7) and duration of admission was 9.0 days (+-9.8). By using the alerting order system, 44 ADRs in 35 patients were detected, the incidence was 8.1%. Cardiovascular drugs (34.1%) caused most ADRs, gastro-intestinal system and cardiovascular system (18.2%) were commonly organ system affected. When ADRs were classified by severity, seriousness and preventable ADR: 40.9% were severity level 3, 75.0% were not serious and 38.6% were preventable ADRs. The average time in monitoring each patient was 1.6 minutes (+-1.4) per day. The intensive monitoring system could detect 76 ADRs in 51 patients, the incidence was 11.8%. Antineoplastic drugs caused most ADRs (27.6%) and gastro-intestinal system was commonly organ system affected (21.1%). When ADRs were classified by severity, seriousness and preventable ADR: 39.5% were severity level 3, 59.2% were not serious and 30.3% were preventable ADR. The average time in monitoring each patient was 7.6 minutes (+-3.3) per day. The intensive monitoring system could detect ADR cases and ADR problems more than the alerting order system, with statistically significance in problems (p<0.05) but not statistically significance in cases (p>0.05). Average time used by the intensive monitoring system was significantly more than by the alerting order system (p<0.05). The intensive monitoring system could detect more comprehensive ADRs than the alerting order system including number drug groups, organ systems, preventable ADRs, severe ADRs and serious ADRs. Therefore, the intensive monitoring system provides an excellent method for pharmacists to actively participate with healthcare team that could lead to more safe and efficiency in patient care.