IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/drugsa/v46y2023i7d10.1007_s40264-023-01312-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expert Consensus on the Nephrotoxic Potential of 195 Medications in the Non-intensive Care Setting: A Modified Delphi Method

Author

Listed:
  • Britney A. Stottlemyer

    (University of Pittsburgh School of Pharmacy)

  • Kaleab Z. Abebe

    (University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine)

  • Paul M. Palevsky

    (University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine
    VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System)

  • Linda Fried

    (University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine
    VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System)

  • Ivonne H. Schulman

    (National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), National Institutes of Health (NIH))

  • Chirag R. Parikh

    (Johns Hopkins School of Medicine)

  • Emilio Poggio

    (Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic)

  • Edward D. Siew

    (Tennessee Valley Health Systems (TVHS) Nashville Veterans Affairs Hospital)

  • Orlando M. Gutierrez

    (University of Alabama at Birmingham)

  • Edward Horwitz

    (MetroHealth)

  • Matthew R. Weir

    (University of Maryland School of Medicine)

  • F. Perry Wilson

    (Yale School of Medicine)

  • Sandra L. Kane-Gill

    (University of Pittsburgh School of Pharmacy)

Abstract

Introduction Nephrotoxin exposure is significantly associated with acute kidney injury (AKI) development. A standardized list of nephrotoxic medications to surveil and their perceived nephrotoxic potential (NxP) does not exist for non-critically ill patients. Objective This study generated consensus on the nephrotoxic effect of 195 medications used in the non-intensive care setting. Methods Potentially nephrotoxic medications were identified through a comprehensive literature search, and 29 participants with nephrology or pharmacist expertise were identified. The primary outcome was NxP by consensus. Participants rated each drug on a scale of 0–3 (not nephrotoxic to definite nephrotoxicity). Group consensus was met if ≥ 75% of responses were one single rating or a combination of two consecutive ratings. If ≥ 50% of responses indicated “unknown” or not used in the non-intensive care setting, the medication was removed for consideration. Medications not meeting consensus for a given round were included in the subsequent round(s). Results A total of 191 medications were identified in the literature, with 4 medications added after the first round from participants’ recommendations. NxP index rating consensus after three rounds was: 14 (7.2%) no NxP in almost all situations (rating 0); 62 (31.8%) unlikely/possibly nephrotoxic (rating 0.5); 21 (10.8%) possibly nephrotoxic (rating 1); 49 (25.1%) possibly/probably nephrotoxic (rating 1.5); 2 (1.0%) probably nephrotoxic (rating 2); 8 (4.1%) probably/definite nephrotoxic (rating 2.5); 0 (0.0%) definitely nephrotoxic (rating 3); and 39 (20.0%) medications were removed from consideration. Conclusions NxP index rating provides clinical consensus on perceived nephrotoxic medications in the non-intensive care setting and homogeneity for future clinical evaluations and research.

Suggested Citation

  • Britney A. Stottlemyer & Kaleab Z. Abebe & Paul M. Palevsky & Linda Fried & Ivonne H. Schulman & Chirag R. Parikh & Emilio Poggio & Edward D. Siew & Orlando M. Gutierrez & Edward Horwitz & Matthew R. , 2023. "Expert Consensus on the Nephrotoxic Potential of 195 Medications in the Non-intensive Care Setting: A Modified Delphi Method," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 46(7), pages 677-687, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:46:y:2023:i:7:d:10.1007_s40264-023-01312-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s40264-023-01312-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40264-023-01312-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40264-023-01312-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:46:y:2023:i:7:d:10.1007_s40264-023-01312-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40264 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.