Gohar Eslami - Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Cardiovascular Research Center, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran.
Elahe Karimpour Razkenari - Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Mazandaran University of Medical Science, Sari, Iran.
Yahya Sharifi - Pharmaceutical Sciences Research Center, Hemoglobinopathy Institute, Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Sari, Iran.
Aria Soleimani - Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran.
Ebrahim Salehifar - Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Research Center, Hemoglobinopathy Institute, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran.
Parastoo Karimi Aliabadi - Department of Family Medicine, Diabetes Research Center, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran.

Background: Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPIs) are the most common medicine for the treatment and prophylaxis of acid peptic conditions. The inappropriate use of the PPIs, mainly the intravenous form of pantoprazole may lead to excessive cost and unexpected adverse effects.  Objectives: The present study aimed to evaluate the use of intravenous pantoprazole in the International Heart Center in the north of Iran. Methods: The current retrospective study was performed on ۲۱۵ patients hospitalized in Fatemeh Zahra Hospital in Sari City, Iran. Patients’ demographics, the type and doses of pantoprazole, and other relevant clinical data were recorded from their documentation. The appropriate use of pantoprazole was evaluated according to recommendations provided by Medscape ۲۰۲۰, and UpToDate ۲۰۲۰. Results: Prescribing PPI was appropriate for ۵۳.۵% of the examined patients; however, the majority of intravenous prescription cases were inappropriate (۷۶.۷%). Oral PPIs could have been used in ۹۳.۵% of the cases; however, they received the parenteral form of pantoprazole. The main cause of pantoprazole prescription in the explored hospital was stress ulcer prophylaxis, with the median ۴/۱۸ days used, which internal specialists in most of the cases (۴۵.۶%) prescribed. Conclusion: In the current study, administrating intravenous pantoprazole was inappropriate in most of the cases. As a result of this improper administration, the extensive cost is exposed to the healthcare system, i.e., likely to be unsafe for patients. Accordingly, risk and indication evaluation for the prescription of pantoprazole should be a priority in each patient. Finally, it seems necessary to determine a protocol for PPI prescription per hospital for the rational use of drugs.

Pantoprazole, Drug Use Evaluation, Cardiovascular disease, Peptic ulcer