MỘT SỐ VẤN ĐỀ LIÊN QUAN ĐẾN THUỐC TRONG KÊ ĐƠN THUỐC HÓA TRỊ TRÊN BỆNH NHÂN PHỤ UNG THƯ

Ba Hai Le1, Thị Phương Hoàng2, Văn Bình Hoàng2, Thành Hải Nguyễn1, Thị Liên Hương Nguyễn1, Thị Thảo Nguyễn1, Thị Hải Hà Thân2, Huy Tuấn Nguyễn2, Văn Thắng Nguyễn2,
1 Trường Đại học Dược Hà Nội
2 Bệnh viện Phụ sản Trung ương

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objective: Identifying drug-related problems (DRPs) in clinical settings is crucial, particularly for patients with gynecologic cancers. This study aimed to detect DRPs associated with dosing regimens prescribed to these patients. Subjects and Methods: This retrospective descriptive study utilized data from medical records of patients treated with chemotherapy in the Gynecologic Oncology Department at the National Hospital of Obstetrics and Gynecology. The study focused on patients discharged between July 1, 2021, and June 30, 2022. DRP is determined according to the Ministry of Health guidance at Decision 3547/QĐ-BYT. Results: A total of 1,992 DRPs were detected across 4,347 prescriptions for 159 patients. These included 735 DRPs related to dosage (36.9%), 155 DRPs involving dilution solvents (7.8%), 382 DRPs related to infusion rates (19.2%), and 720 DRPs concerning treatment cycle intervals (36.1%). The majority of dosage-related DRPs were due to underdosing (77.4%), with most discrepancies between actual and theoretical doses falling within the 10-20% range (61.0%). Conclusion: Most of the DRPs identified were associated with dosage and administration, which are preventable. Enhancing clinical pharmacy services for gynecologic oncology patients is necessary to reduce DRPs and ensure the safety and effectiveness of chemotherapy.


 

Article Details

References

1. Europe Pharmaceutical Care Network. Classification for drug related problems. PCNE Classification for Drug-Related Problems. 2020; 9(1).
2. Lekpittaya NKS, Angkanavisul J, Siriudompas T, Montakantikul P, Paiboonvong T. Drug-related problems identified by clinical pharmacists in an academic medical centre in Thailand. J Pharm Policy Pract. 2023 Dec 16; 17(1).
3. Abunahlah NEA, Velibeyoglu FM, Sancar M. Drug related problems identified by clinical pharmacist at the Internal Medicine Ward in Turkey. Int J Clin Pharm. 2018 Apr; 40(2):360-367.
4. Kim IS, Gratwohl A, Stebler C, Hausmann M, Tichelli A, Stern A, Speck B. Accidental overdose of multiple chemotherapeutic agents. Korean J Intern Med. 1989 Jul; 4(2):171-3. DOI: 10.3904/kjim.1989.4.2.171. PMID: 2486848; PMCID: PMC4534987.
5. O'Dowd A. Inquiry to be held after deaths of cancer patients from apparent overdose. BMJ. 2007 Aug 11; 335 (7614):274. DOI:10.1136/bmj.39300. 394005.DB. PMID:17690352; PMCID: PMC1941873.
6. Vantard N, Ranchon F, et al. EPICC study: Evaluation of pharmaceutical intervention in cancer care. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2015; 40(2):196-203.
7. Nguyễn Thùy Giang. Khảo sát cách sử dụng thuốc chống ung thư tại khoa Phụ Ung Thư Bệnh viện Phụ sản Trung Ương. Khóa luận tốt nghiệp Dược sĩ, Trường Đại học Dược Hà Nội. 2014.
8. Chu X Xue P, Zhu S. Management of chemotherapy dose intensity for metastatic colorectal cancer. Oncol Lett. 2002; 23(5):141.
9. Lyman GH. Impact of chemotherapy dose intensity on cancer patient outcomes. JNatl Compr Canc Netw. 2009; 7(1):99-108.