A comparative study of adverse drug reactions reported by healthcare professionals and patients in a tertiary care teaching hospital
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20171499Keywords:
Adverse drug reaction, Patient self-reportingAbstract
Background: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are one of major health concern affecting population of all ages causing significant morbidity mortality and hospitalization of the patients increasing the economic burden on the society. Monitoring of ADRs is of paramount importance for the continued effective and safe use of medicines. Though they are unavoidable accompaniments of pharmacotherapy, the reporting of ADR is poor and inadequate. Substantial under-reporting and selective reporting of ADRs are the major drawbacks of the commonly followed method of spontaneous reporting by healthcare professionals (HCP). Patient direct reporting of ADR has been incorporated into the pharmacivigilance (PV) system in several countries like USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands. Patient direct reporting of ADR was qualitatively similar to HCP ADR report. Patient reports often had richer narratives than those of HCPs. Patient reports often contained detailed information about the impact of the suspected ADR on the patient’s quality of life. The quality of ADR reported by the patients was similar to the reports by HCP in terms of description of ADRs and its severity. So, present study was taken to evaluate the process of spontaneous reporting of suspected ADR by the patient and compare the quality of ADR reported by Health care professional and Patients.
Methods: This study was a prospective observational study conducted in 111 consecutive patients who experienced ADRs in the department of medicine Comparison between spontaneous reporting by healthcare professionals and patient direct reporting of adverse drug reactions was assessed in terms of response rate, pattern of ADR reported, causality by Naranjo s scale, severity by modified Hartwig scale and preventability by using Schumock and Thornton scale. Social, emotional, occupational impact due to ADR and narrative elaboration scores were also compared.
Results: Majority of the ADRs were from HCP as compared to patient reporting, indicating that better awareness among HCP about pharmacovigilance Majority of the reactions reported by patient were mild in severity, in contrast majority of ADR reported by HCP were moderate. Comparisons between HCP reporting and patient direct reporting also revealed that majority of ADR in both groups were probably preventable. Qualitative analysis reported ADR showed that majority of ADR reported by HCP had no narration or had scant narration, in contrast to patient direct reporting had very elaborate narration of ADR. Patient who did direct reporting of ADR highlighted more about emotional impact, occupational impact and social impact of ADR occurred to them, when compared to ADRs reported by HCP.
Conclusions: Patients were clearly willing to report any adverse drug reactions occurring to them. The evidence indicates that patient reporting of suspected ADRs has more Potential benefits than drawbacks. The results indicate that patient perceptions of potential ADRs are relevant and should be an integral part of ADR reporting system.
References
Sriram S, Ghasemi A, Ramaswamy R, Devi M, Balasuramanian R, Ravi TK, Sabzghabaee AM. Prevalence of adverse drug reaction at a private tertiary care hospital in south India. JRMS. 2011;16(1):16-25.
Blenkinsopp A, Wilkie P, Routledge PA. Patient reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions: a review of published literature and international experience. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2006;63(2):148-56.
Gonzalez EL, Herdeiro MT, Figueiras A. Determinants of under-reporting of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review. Drug safety. 2009;32(1):19-31.
Avery AJ, Anderson C, Bond CM, Gifford A, Hannarord PC. Evaluation of patient reporting of adverse drug reactions to the UK'Yellow Card Scheme': literature review, descriptive and qualitative analyses, and questionnaire surveys. Health Technol Assess. 2011;15(20):1-6.
Inman WHW. Attitudes to adverse drug-reaction reporting. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1996;41:433-5.
Avery AJ, Anderson C, Bond CM, Fortnum H, Gifford A, Hannaford PC, et al. Evaluation of patient reporting of adverse drug reactions to the UK' Yellow Card Scheme': literature review, descriptive and qualitative analyses, and questionnaire surveys. Health Technol Assess 2011;15(20):129.
Vijendra R, Pundarikaksha HP, Gopal MG, Girish K, Vasundara K, Jyothi R. A prospective study of cutaneous adverse drug reaction in a tertiary care hospital. National journal of basic medical sciences. 2013:3(1):44-51.
Acharya T, Mehta D, Shah H, Dave J. Pharmacovigilance study of adverse cutaneous drug reactions in a tertiary care hospital. Nat J Physiol Pharm Pharmacol. 2013;3:75-81.
Arulmani R, Rajendran SD, Suresh B. Adverse drug reaction monitoring in a secondary care hospital in South India. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;65(2):210-16.
Palanisamy S, Arul kumaran KSG, Rajasekaran A. A study on assessment, monitoring, documentation and reporting of adverse drug reactions at a multi-speciality tertiary care teaching hospital in South India. International Journal of Pharm Tech Research. 1(4):1519-22.
Prosser TR, Kamysz PL. Multidisciplinary adverse drug reaction surveillance programme. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1990;47:1334-9.
Wester K, Jonnson AK, Spigset O, Druid H, Hagg S. Incidence of fatal adverse drug reactions: a population based study. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;65(4):573-79.
Gor AP, Desai SV. Adverse drug reactions (ADR) in the inpatients of medicine department of a rural tertiary care teaching hospital and influence of pharmacovigilance in reporting ADR. Indian J Pharmacol. 2008;40(1):37-40.
Vora MB, Trivedi HR, Shah BK, Tripathi CB. Adverse drug reaction in inpatient of internal medicine wards at a tertiary care hospital: a prospective cohort study. J Pharmacol Pharmacother. 2011;2(1):21-5.
Avery AJ, Anderson C, Bond CM, Gifford A, Hannarord PC et al. Evaluation of patient reporting of adverse drug reactions to the UK'Yellow Card Scheme': literature review, descriptive and qualitative analyses, and questionnaire surveys. Health Technol Assess. 2011;15(20):49-72.
