Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2014 Jul;70(7):799-815.
doi: 10.1007/s00228-014-1686-x. Epub 2014 May 2.

Application of drug-related problem (DRP) classification systems: a review of the literature

Affiliations
Review

Application of drug-related problem (DRP) classification systems: a review of the literature

Benjamin J Basger et al. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2014 Jul.

Abstract

Background: For over 20 years, researchers wanting to record, discuss and compare drug-related problems (DRPs) have had the task of choosing between a multiplicity of classification systems offering a variable number of categories identified as causes of DRPs and DRPs.

Objective: To characterise studies which have reported DRPs through the use of a DRP classification system to determine types of classification systems chosen, factors influencing their choice, and methodological issues that may have affected their application.

Method: A systematic search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (Ovid), EMBASE and PubMed was performed. All English language studies reporting DRPs through the use of a classification system published between January 2000 and July 2013 were reviewed, with no limitation on the type of study.

Results: Of 2,774 articles screened, 268 met our inclusion criteria. We identified the use of 20 different types of DRP classification systems. Three quarters of studies modified an existing classification system or developed their own. Few studies stated reasons for choice of system. We identified issues such as variability in skills of data collectors, selective choice of patients and missing data, affecting application of classification systems and limiting quality, analysis and comparison of studies.

Conclusion: There appeared to be no consensus on preference or structure of classification systems. Future studies should consider addressing or acknowledging the methodological issues identified. Through identification and discussion of these problems, recommendations for future studies and for practice have been made.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Drugs Aging. 2012 Jul 1;29(7):593-605 - PubMed
    1. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2008 Dec;4(4):320-31 - PubMed
    1. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2012;52(6):e144-52 - PubMed
    1. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2011 Jan 11;4:9-13 - PubMed
    1. J Manag Care Pharm. 2010 Apr;16(3):185-95 - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources