Comparison of Clinical Importance of Drug Interactions Identified by Hospital Pharmacists and a Local Clinical Decision Support System

Background: Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) may cause adverse drug events, potentially leading to hospital admission. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) can improve decision-making by clinicians as well as drug safety. However, previous research has suggested that pharmacists are concerned about discrepancies between CDSSs and common clinical practice in terms of severity ratings and recommended actions for DDIs. Objectives: The primary objective was to characterize the level of agreement in terms of DDI severity ranking and actions recommended between the local CDSS and pharmacists. The secondary objectives were to determine the level of agreement among pharmacists concerning DDI severity, to determine the influence of the CDSS on clinicians' decision-making, and to review the literature supporting the severity rankings of DDIs identified in the study institution's database. Methods: This 2-part survey study involved pharmacists and pharmacy residents working at 1 of 4 health organizations within the Lower Mainland Pharmacy Services, British Columbia, who were invited to participate by email. Participants were first asked to rank the severity of 15 drug pairs (representing potential DDIs) on a 5-point Likert scale and to select an action to manage each interaction. Participants were then given the CDSS severity classification for the same 15 pairs and again asked to select an appropriate management action. Results: Of the estimated 500 eligible pharmacists, a total of 73 pharmacists participated, for a response rate of about 15%. For DDIs of moderate severity, most participants chose to monitor. For severe and contraindicated interactions, the severity ranking and action proposed by participants varied, despite the same severity classification by the CDSS. There was poor agreement among respondents about the severity of the various DDIs. Moreover, knowledge of the CDSS severity ranking did not seem to change the actions proposed by most respondents. Conclusion: This study identified a gap between the local CDSS and clinical practice. There were discrepancies in terms of severity rankings and actions proposed to manage DDIs, particularly for severe and contraindicated DDIs. The current CDSS did not appear to have a large impact on clinical decision-making, which suggests that it may not be functioning to its full potential.