Skip to main content
Log in

Tablet Splitting of Antiepileptic Drugs in Pediatric Epilepsy: Potential Effect on Plasma Drug Concentrations

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Drugs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Tablet splitting is the process of dividing a tablet into portions to obtain a prescribed dose of medication. Very few studies have investigated whether split parts of a tablet deliver the expected amount of drug to patients.

Objective

Our objectives were to evaluate the split parts of adult-dose tablet formulations for percentage of weight deviation, weight uniformity, weight loss, drug content, and the content uniformity of four antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) prescribed to pediatric patients. We also measured AED plasma concentrations in the children.

Methods

We chose to study first-line AEDs (phenytoin sodium [PHE], sodium valproate [SVA], carbamazepine, and phenobarbitone) as they are routinely prescribed in India. We asked caregivers to perform the same splitting process they follow in their homes on three whole tablets during their routine visit to the outpatient department. After caregivers split the tablets, we studied the weight and content of the split parts. We also used high-performance liquid chromatography to study plasma drug concentrations in children who had received split AEDs for at least 4 months.

Results

A total of 168 caregivers participated in the study, and we analyzed 1098 split tablet parts. In total, 539 (49.0 %) split parts were above the specified limit of the 2010 Indian Pharmacopeia (IP) acceptable percentage weight deviation (PHE 169 [48.8 %], SVA 187 [51.9 %], carbamazepine 56 [41.1 %], phenobarbitone 127 [49.6 %]); 456 (41.5 %) split parts were outside the proxy IP specification for drug content (PHE 135 [39.0 %], SVA 140 [38.8 %], carbamazepine 51 [37.5 %], phenobarbitone 130 [50.7 %]), and 253 split parts were outside the acceptable content uniformity range of <85 % and >115 % (PHE 85 [24.5 %], SVA 98 [27.2 %], carbamazepine 14 [10.2 %], phenobarbitone 56 [21.8 %]). In total, 130 (72.2 %) patients had plasma drug concentrations outside the therapeutic range (PHE 36 [72.0 %], SVA 39 [78.0 %], carbamazepine 34 [68.0 %], phenobarbitone 21 [70.0 %]).

Conclusions

Splitting adult-dosage formulations of AEDs results in patients not receiving the optimal dose. Plasma drug concentrations are also not optimal. Pediatric dosage formulations should be preferred to splitting adult-dosage formulations in pediatric epilepsy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zaid AN, Al-Ramahi R, Ghoush AA, Malkieh N, Kharoaf M. Influence of physical factors on tablet splitting, weight and content uniformity of atenolol tablets. J Pharm Investig. 2012;42:229–34.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Duncan MC, Castle SS, Streetman DS. Effect of tablet splitting on serum cholesterol concentrations. Ann Pharmacother. 2002;36:205–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fawell NG, Cookson TL, Scranton SS. Relationship between tablet splitting and compliance, drug acquisition cost, and patient acceptance. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1999;56:2542–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Quinzler R, Gasse C, Schneider A, Kaufmann-Kolle P, Szecsenyi J, Haefeli WE. The frequency of inappropriate tablet splitting in primary care. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2006;62:1065–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. De Spiegeleer B, Van Hoorebeke L, De Spiegeleer A, Castelein P, Van Bortel L. The paradox of scored tablets: a cost-saving risk. Pharmazie. 2009;64:550–2.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wilson MMG, Kaiser FE, Morley JE. Tablet-breaking ability of older persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Educ. 2001;27:530–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Green GA, Berg C, Valdez N, Kaplan A. Accuracy and ease of splitting scored Coumadin, Lanoxin and Toprol XL Tablets. Poster presententation. AAPS Los Angeles. 2009. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carolyn_Berg/publication/265425874_Accuracy_and_ease_of_splitting_scored_Coumadin_Lanoxin_and_Toprol_XL_Tablets/links/54d2907d0cf2b0c6146a12fe.pdf. Accessed 13 May 2016.

  8. Nunn A, Richey R, Shah U, Barker C, Craig J, Peak M, et al. Estimating the requirement for manipulation of medicines to provide accurate doses for children. Eur J Hosp Pharm. 2013;20:3–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. McDevitt JT, Gurst AH, Chen Y. Accuracy of tablet splitting. Pharmacotherapy. 1998;18:193–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Shah RB, Collier JS, Sayeed VA, Bryant A, Habib MJ, Khan MA. Tablet splitting of a narrow therapeutic index drug: a case with levothyroxine sodium. AAPS Pharm Sci Tech. 2010;11:1359–67.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Chou CL, Hsu CC, Chou CY, Chen TJ, Chou LF, Chou YC. Tablet splitting of narrow therapeutic index drugs: a nationwide survey in Taiwan. Int J Clin Pharm. 2015;37:1235–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Marriott JL, Nation RL. Splitting tablets. Aust Prescr. 2002;25:133–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Mosena MS, Van der Merwe E. The appropriateness and risks of tablet splitting. SA Pharm J. 2009;76:30–6.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Swain TR, Rath B, Dehury S, Tarai A, Das P, Samal R, et al. Pricing and availability of some essential child specific medicines in Odisha. Indian J Pharmacol. 2015;47:496–501.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Patsalos PN, Berry DJ, Bourgeois BFD, Cloyd JC, Glauser TA, Johannessen SI, et al. Antiepileptic drugs—best practice guidelines for therapeutic drug monitoring: a position paper by the subcommission on therapeutic drug monitoring. ILAE Commission on Therapeutic Strategies. Epilepsia. 2008;49:1239–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. India, Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission, (editors). Indian pharmacopoeia, 2010. Sixth edition. Ghaziabad: Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission; 2010.

  17. Zaid AN, Ghoush AA, Al-Ramahi R, Are’r M. Evaluation of the discrepancy between the european pharmacopoeia test and an adopted United States pharmacopoeia test regarding the weight uniformity of scored tablet halves: is harmonization required? J Pharm Sci Technol. 2012;66:20–7.

    Google Scholar 

  18. De Spiegeleer B, Vooren LV, Thonissen T, Joye P, Cornelissen B, Lammens G, et al. Mass uniformity: influence of operational compression conditions on breakability of scored tablets as part of manufacturing robustness evaluation. J Food Drug Anal. 2005;13:22–9.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Van Vooren L, De Spiegeleer B, Thonissen T, Joye P, Van Durme J, Slegers G. Statistical analysis of tablet breakability methods. J Pharm Pharmaceut Sci. 2002;5:190–8.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Varaprasad A, Sriram N, Godwin Isaac Blessing A, Jawahar M, Thangamuthu S. Method development and validation of phenytoin sodium in bulk and its pharmaceutical dosage form by RP-HPLC method. Int J Biol Pharm Res. 2012;3:126–9.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kundu S, Gyadangi B. A simple, validated, single HPLC method for the determination of assay, dissolution, related substance of an antiepileptic drug in different pharmaceutical dosage form. Indo Am J Pharm Res. 2013;3:1722–32.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Guideline IHT. Validation of analytical procedures: text and methodology. Q2 R1. 2005;1. Available from: http://somatek.com/content/uploads/2014/06/sk140605h.pdf. Accessed 13 May 2016.

  23. Gupta RK, Singh UK, Kumar S, Moothan B. Estimation of sodium valproate in tablet dosage form by RP-HPLC without prior derivatization: application to dissolution studies. Int J Pharm Sci Drug Res. 2009;1:103–6.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Karde M, Pawar H, Geevarghese R, Khatri J. Development and validation of RP-HPLC method for estimation of valproic acid in dissolution study of its formulation. Int J Pharmacy Pharm Sci. 2012;4(Suppl 5):201–6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Miller RB, Vranderick M. A validated HPLC method for the determination of carbamazepine and carbamazepine 10,11-epoxide in human plasma. J Liq Chromatogr Relat Technol. 1993;16:1249–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Dalmora SL, da Sangoi MS, Nogueira DR, D’Avila FB, Moreno RA, Sverdloff CE, et al. Determination of phenobarbital in human plasma by a specific liquid chromatography method: application to a bioequivalence study. Quím Nova. 2010;33:124–9.

  27. Prasad CVN, Kumari CHS, Reddy BS, Sriramulu J. New RP-HPLC method for the determination of valproic acid in human plasma. J Pharm Sci Res. 2010;2:355–9.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Szende V, Silvia I, Vari C, Titica DM, Daniela-Lucia M, Carmen C, et al. Determination of valproic acid in human plasma by high-performance liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry detection. Acta Medica Marisiensis. 2012;58:54–8.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Cochren BE. Splitting bupropion extended-release tablets. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1999;56:575.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Zhao N, Zidan A, Tawakkul M, Sayeed VA, Khan M. Tablet splitting: product quality assessment of metoprolol succinate extended release tablets. Int J Pharm. 2010;401:25–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Parra D, Beckey NP, Raval HS, Schnacky KR, Calabrese V, Coakley RW, et al. Effect of splitting simvastatin tablets for control of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Am J Cardiol. 2005;95:1481–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Gee M, Hasson NK, Hahn T, Ryono R. Effects of a tablet-splitting program in patients taking HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors: analysis of clinical effects, patient satisfaction, compliance, and cost avoidance. J Manag Care Pharm. 2002;8:453–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Berg C, Ekedahl A. Dosages involving splitting tablets: common but unnecessary?: Dosages involving splitting tablets. J Pharm Health Serv Res. 2010;1:137–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Chou CY, Hsu CC, Chiang SC, Ho CC, Chou CL, Wu MS, et al. Association between physician specialty and risk of prescribing inappropriate pill splitting. PLoS One. 2013;8:e70113.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Arnet I, von Moos M, Hersberger KE. Wrongly prescribed half tablets in a swiss university hospital. Int J Clin Med. 2012;3:637–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Rosenberg JM, Nathan JP, Plakogiannis F. Weight variability of pharmacist-dispensed split tablets. J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash). 2002;42:200–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Habib WA, Alanizi AS, Abdelhamid MM, Alanizi FK. Accuracy of tablet splitting: Comparison study between hand splitting and tablet cutter. Saudi Pharm J. 2014;22:454–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Verrue C, Mehuys E, Boussery K, Remon JP, Petrovic M. Tablet-splitting: a common yet not so innocent practice: tablet-splitting. J Adv Nurs. 2011;67:26–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Zaid AN, Ghosh AA. Compliance of scored tablet halves produced by Palestinian Pharmaceutical Companies with the new European Pharmacopoeia requirements. Arch Pharm Res. 2011;34:1183–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Stimpel M, Vetter H, Küffer B, Groth H, Greminger P, Vetter W. The scored tablet: a source of error in drug dosing? J Hypertens. 1985;3:S97–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Volpe DA, Gupta A, Ciavarella AB, Faustino PJ, Sayeed VA, Khan MA. Comparison of the stability of split and intact gabapentin tablets. Int J Pharm. 2008;350:65–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Pouplin T, Phuong PN, Toi PV, Nguyen Pouplin J, Farrar J. Isoniazid, pyrazinamide and rifampicin content variation in split fixed-dose combination tablets. PLoS One. 2014;9:e102047.

  43. Teng J, Song CK, Williams RL, Polli JE. Lack of medication dose uniformity in commonly split tablets. J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash). 2002;42:195–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Hill S, Varker AS, Karlage K, Myrdal PB. Analysis of drug content and weight uniformity for half-tablets of 6 commonly split medications. J Manag Care Pharm. 2009;15:253–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the pediatric residents for their support in conducting the study and the Department of Pharmacy for providing the medicines to carry out the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Batmanabane Gitanjali.

Ethics declarations

Funding

No funding was received for the conduct or publication of this study.

Conflict of interest

Ravi Prasad Nidanapu, Sundaram Rajan, Subramanian Mahadevan, and Batmanabane Gitanjali have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

The study and consent forms were approved by the local Institute Ethics Committee (No. JIP/IEC/2013/5/198) and JIPMER Scientific Advisory Committee (No. JSAC 09/10/2013).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nidanapu, R., Rajan, S., Mahadevan, S. et al. Tablet Splitting of Antiepileptic Drugs in Pediatric Epilepsy: Potential Effect on Plasma Drug Concentrations. Pediatr Drugs 18, 451–463 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40272-016-0193-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40272-016-0193-1

Keywords

Navigation