Dose adjustment in patients with liver cirrhosis: impact on adverse drug reactions and hospitalizations

To assess drug-related problems in patients with liver cirrhosis by investigating the prevalence of inadequately dosed drugs and their association with adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and hospitalizations.

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.

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.

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.