Correlates of spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions within primary care: the paradox of low prescribers who are high reporters

AIM(S) To examine Primary Care Trust (PCT) demographics influencing general practitioner (GP) involvement in pharmacovigilance. METHODS PCT adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports to the Yellow Card scheme between April 2004 and March 2006 were obtained for the UK West Midlands region. Reports were analysed by all drugs, and most commonly reported drugs (‘top drugs’). PCT data, adjusted for population size, were aggregated. Prescribing statistics and other characteristics were obtained for each PCT, and associations between these characteristics and ADR reporting rates were examined. RESULTS During 2004–06, 1175 reports were received from PCTs. Two hundred and eighty (24%) of these reports were for 14 ‘top drugs’. The mean rate of reporting for PCTs was 213 reports per million population. A total of 153 million items were prescribed during 2004–06, of which 33% were ‘top drugs’. Reports for all drugs and ‘top drugs’ were inversely correlated with the number of prescriptions issued per thousand population (rs = -0.413, 95% CI -0.673, -0.062, P < 0.05, and r = -0.420, 95% CI -0.678, -0.071, P < 0.05, respectively). Reporting was significantly negatively correlated with the percentages of male GPs within a PCT, GPs over 55 years of age, single-handed GPs within a PCT, the average list size of a GP within a PCT, the overall deprivation scores and average QOF total points. ADR reports did not correlate significantly with the proportion of the population over 65 years old. CONCLUSIONS Some PCT characteristics appear to be associated with low levels of ADR reporting. The association of low prescribing areas with high ADR reporting rates replicates previous findings.

The pharmacist's contribution towards monitoring and reporting adverse drug reactions

The activities and function of the West Midlands Adverse Drug Reaction Study Group are described. The impact of the Group on the reporting of adverse drug reactions to the CSM by the yellow card system has been evaluated in several ways including a comparison with the Trent Region. The role of the pharmacist in the Group is highlighted. A nationwide survey of the hospital pharmacist's involvement in adverse drug reaction reporting and monitoring is described, the results are reported and discussed. The available sources of information on adverse drug reactions, both primary and secondary, are critically reviewed. A checklist of necessary details for case reports is developed and examples of problems in the literature are given. The contribution of the drug information pharmacist in answering enquiries and encouraging reporting is examined. A role for the ward pharmacist in identifying, reporting, documenting and following up adverse drug reactions is proposed. Studies conducted to support this role are described and the results discussed. The ward pharmacist's role in preventing adverse drug reactions is also outlined. The reporting of adverse drug reactions in Australia is contrasted with the U.K. and particular attention is drawn to the pharmacist's contribution in the former. The problems in evaluating drug safety are discussed and examples are given where serious reactions have only been recognised after many patients have been exposed. To remedy this situation a case is made for enhancing the CSM yellow card scheme by further devolution of reporting, increasing the involvement of pharmacists and improving arrangements at the CSM. It is proposed that pharmacists should undertake the responsibility for reporting reactions to the CSM in some instances.

Warfarin toxicity: do discharge ICD-10 codes and yellow cards accurately identify serious adverse drug reactions?

Focal points: ICD-10 codings and spontaneous yellow card reports for warfarin toxicity were compared retrospectively over a one-year period Eighteen cases of ICD-10 coded warfarin toxicity were identified from a total of 55,811 coded episodes More than three times as many ADRs to warfarin were found by screening ICD-10 codes as were reported spontaneously using the yellow card scheme Valuable information is being lost to regulatory authorities and as recognised reporters to the yellow card scheme, pharmacists are well placed to report these ADRs, enhancing their role in the safe and appropriate prescribing of warfarin

A patient's perspective:the impact of adverse drug reactions on patients and their views on reporting

What is known and objective: Adverse drug reactions to prescribed medication are relatively common events. However, the impact such reactions have on patients and their attitude to reporting such events have only been poorly explored. Previous studies relying on self-reporting patients indicate that altruism is an important factor. In the United Kingdom, patient reporting started in 2005; though, numbers of serious reports remain low. Method: A purposive sample of fifteen patients who had been admitted to an inner city hospital with an adverse drug reaction were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire. Patients were asked to relate in their own words their experience of an adverse drug reaction. Patient's reactions to the information leaflet, adherence to treatment and use of other sources of information on medication were assessed. Interviews were recorded, and a thematic analysis of patients'responses was performed. Results and discussion: Analysis of the patient interviews demonstrated the reality of being admitted to hospital is often a frightening process with a significant emotional cost. Anger, isolation, resentment and blame were common factors, particularly when medicines had been prescribed for acute conditions. For patients with chronic conditions, a more phlegmatic approach was seen especially with conditions with a strong support networks. Patients felt that communication and information should have been more readily available from the health care professional who prescribed the medication, although few had read the patient information leaflet. Only a minority of patients linked the medication they had taken to the adverse event, although some had received false reassurance that the drug was not related to their illness creating additional barriers. In contrast to previous studies, many patients felt that adverse drug reporting was not their concern, particularly as they obtained little direct benefit from it. The majority of patients were unaware of the Yellow Card Scheme in the UK for patient reporting. Even when explained, the scheme was felt too cold and impersonal and not a patient's 'job'. What is new and conclusion: Patients having a severe adverse drug reaction following an acute illness felt negative emotions towards their health care provider. Those with a chronic condition rationalized the event and coped better with its impact. Neither group felt that reporting the adverse reaction was their responsibility. Encouraging patients to report remains important but expecting patients to report solely for altruistic purposes may be unrealistic. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Patient experiences of serious adverse drug reactions and their attitudes to medicines:a qualitative study of survivors of Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis in the UK

Background: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) cause significant morbidity and mortality and account for around 6.5% of hospital admissions. Patient experiences of serious ADRs and their long-term impact on patients' lives, including their influence on current attitudes towards medicines, have not been previously explored. Objective: The aim of the study was to explore the experiences, beliefs, and attitudes of survivors of serious ADRs, using drug-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN) as a paradigm. Methods: A retrospective, qualitative study was undertaken using detailed semi-structured interviews. Fourteen adult survivors of SJS and TEN, admitted to two teaching hospitals in the UK, one the location of a tertiary burns centre, were interviewed. Interview transcripts were independently analysed by three different researchers and themes emerging from the text identified. Results: All 14 patients were aware that their condition was drug induced, and all but one knew the specific drug(s) implicated. Several expressed surprise at the perceived lack of awareness of the ADR amongst healthcare professionals, and described how the ADR was mistaken for another condition. Survivors believed that causes of the ADR included (i) being given too high a dose of the drug; (ii) medical staff ignoring existing allergies; and (iii) failure to monitor blood tests. Only two believed that the reaction was unavoidable. Those who believed that the condition could have been avoided had less trust in healthcare professionals. The ADR had a persisting impact on their current lives physically and psychologically. Many now avoided medicines altogether and were fearful of becoming ill enough to need them. © 2011 Adis Data Information BV. All rights reserved. Conclusions: Life-threatening ADRs continued to affect patients’ lives long after the event. Patients’ beliefs regarding the cause of the ADR differed, and may have influenced their trust in healthcare professionals and medicines. We propose that clear communication during the acute phase of a serious ADR may therefore be important.

Pharmacovigilance in children : detecting adverse drug reactions in routine electronic healthcare records. A systematic review

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Pharmacovigilance in children : detecting adverse drug reactions in routine electronic healthcare records. A systematic review

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Pharmacovigilance in children : detecting adverse drug reactions in routine electronic healthcare records. A systematic review

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Addressing Inpatient Admissions and Readmissions Due to Adverse Drug Reactions in the Oldest Old

Adverse drugs reactions (ADRs) in the older population are a major healthcare problem resulting in significant morbidity, healthcare consumption and high costs.

A Data Mining Approach for the Identification of Adverse Drug Events (ADE) resulting from Drug-Drug Interactions (DDI) to improve pharmacovigilance

In the current study, epidemiology study is done by means of literature survey in groups identified to be at higher potential for DDIs as well as in other cases to explore patterns of DDIs and the factors affecting them. The structure of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database is studied and analyzed in detail to identify issues and challenges in data mining the drug-drug interactions. The necessary pre-processing algorithms are developed based on the analysis and the Apriori algorithm is modified to suit the process. Finally, the modules are integrated into a tool to identify DDIs. The results are compared using standard drug interaction database for validation. 31% of the associations obtained were identified to be new and the match with existing interactions was 69%. This match clearly indicates the validity of the methodology and its applicability to similar databases. Formulation of the results using the generic names expanded the relevance of the results to a global scale. The global applicability helps the health care professionals worldwide to observe caution during various stages of drug administration thus considerably enhancing pharmacovigilance

Adverse drug reaction as cause of hospital admission of elderly people: a pilot study

The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of adverse drug reactions (ADR) related to hospital admission of elderly people, identifying the use of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM), the ADR and the risk factors associated with the hospitalization. A cross-sectional study was conducted in a private hospital of São Paulo State, Brazil. All patients aged ≥ 60 years, admitted in the general practice ward in May 2006 were interviewed about the drugs used and the symptoms/complaints that resulted in hospitalization. More than a half (54.5 %) of elderly hospitalizations were related with ADR. The therapeutic classes involved with ADR were: cardiovascular (37.7 %), central nervous (34.6 %) and respiratory (5.7 %). The ADR observed were disorders in circulatory (28.4 %), digestive (20.0 %) and respiratory (18.9 %) tracts. 27 elderly had made PIM and in 20 of them this was the cause of hospitalization. Polypharmacy was an ADR risk factor (p = 0.021).These data allows the healthcare professionals upgrade, qualifying them in pharmcovigilance.

Impact of educational interventions on adverse drug events reporting

Spontaneous adverse drug events (ADE) reporting is the main source of data for assessing the risk/benefit of drugs available in the pharmaceutical market. However, its major limitation is underreporting, which hinders and delays the signal detection by Pharmacovigilance (PhV). To identify the techniques of educational intervention (EI) for promotion of PhV by health professionals and to assess their impact. A systematic review was performed in the PUBMED, PAHO, LILACS and EMBASE databases, from November/2011 to January/2012, updated in March/2013. The strategy search included the use of health descriptors and a manual search in the references cited by selected papers. 101 articles were identified, of which 16 met the inclusion criteria. Most of these studies (10) were conducted in European hospitals and physicians were the health professionals subjected to most EI (12), these studies lasted from one month to two years. EI with multifaceted techniques raised the absolute number, the rate of reporting related to adverse drug reactions (ADR), technical defects of health technologies, and also promoted an improvement in the quality of reports, since there was increased reporting of ADR classified as serious, unexpected, related to new drugs and with high degree of causality. Multifaceted educational interventions for multidisciplinary health teams working at all healthcare levels, with sufficient duration to reach all professionals who act in the institution, including issues related to medication errors and therapeutic ineffectiveness, must be validated, with the aim of standardizing the Good Practice of PhV and improve drug safety indicators.