Prevalence, characteristics, and reporting of adverse drug reactions in an Australian hospital: a retrospective review of hospital admissions due to adverse drug reactions

A retrospective analysis of the pharmacovigilance data registry in a tertiary teaching hospital in Jordan

Objectives

The study aims to analyse adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting patterns at Jordan University Hospital to enhance pharmacovigilance practices.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of ADR data from February to August 2023 was conducted. Data included patient demographics, drugs implicated, seriousness criteria, and system organ classes affected.

Results

Among 1340 ADR reports analysed, females accounted for 67.4% of cases, with adults aged 18 to less than 65 years comprising 95.3% of reports. The majority of ADRs were non-serious, with only 2.1% resulting in hospitalisation or prolonged hospital stay. The most frequently reported ADRs included abdominal pain (8.3%), nausea (6.9%), headache (4.7%), and dizziness (4.7%). Notably, cardiovascular system drugs (16.4%) and alimentary tract and metabolism drugs (16.2%) were commonly associated with ADRs, followed by musculoskeletal system drugs (9.0%). Additionally, among all reported drugs, 99.9% were considered suspects, (suspected ADR cases include patient treatment cases for which a likelihood of being related to a drug therapy was scored as 'possible', 'probable', or 'certain' after causality assessment (by the WHO-UMC system in 2017), with oral administration being the predominant route (89.5%).

Conclusion

The study highlights a notable increase in ADR reporting during the study period compared to historical data, indicating heightened awareness and understanding among healthcare providers. Enhanced pharmacovigilance practices, particularly involving pharmacists, are essential for detecting and reporting ADRs effectively. Further investigation into factors contributing to prevalent serious ADRs is warranted to improve patient safety and health outcomes.

The temporal association between adverse drug reactions and antirheumatic drugs utilisation in Western Australia: a retrospective study from real-world data (1995-2015)

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) can result in morbidity, mortality, and higher healthcare costs. Given the limited information available on ADRs associated with antirheumatic medications, this study aims to analyse and compare ADR reporting for these drugs in the pharmacovigilance datasets of Western Australia (WA) and the United States (US).

METHODS

Therapeutic Goods Administration provided WA pharmacovigilance data of selected antirheumatic drugs to from 1995 to 2015. The proportional reporting ratio (PRR) for WA case reports was compared to corresponding USA pharmacovigilance data by assessing the disproportionality of each ADR. clinically significant or true ADRs were determined using the Evans 2001 criteria (n > 2, chi-square > 4, PRR > 2).

RESULTS

A total of 232 reports were found in WA, mostly on sixty-nine women aged 45 to 69. Methotrexate, leflunomide, azathioprine, sulfasalazine, and infliximab had the highest reported ADRs, related to gastrointestinal disorders. Patients who used biological agents in WA had 2.7 times the likelihood of reporting true ADRs compared to conventional antirheumatic drugs. The ADR rates in the two datasets were comparable over the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

The PRR values of ADRs were consistent between WA and US databases. Methotrexate and infliximab use were commonly associated with ADR reports in WA females, with incidence rates comparable to the US; while patients using biological agents were more likely to report true ADRs than those on conventional antirheumatic drugs in WA.

A Web-Based Tool to Report Adverse Drug Reactions by Community Pharmacists in Australia: Usability Testing Study

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are unintended and harmful events associated with medication use. Despite their significance in postmarketing surveillance, quality improvement, and drug safety research, ADRs are vastly underreported. Enhanced digital-based communication of ADR information to regulators and among care providers could significantly improve patient safety.

OBJECTIVE

This paper presents a usability evaluation of the commercially available GuildCare Adverse Event Recording system, a web-based ADR reporting system widely used by community pharmacists (CPs) in Australia.

METHODS

We developed a structured interview protocol encompassing remote observation, think-aloud moderating techniques, and retrospective questioning to gauge the overall user experience, complemented by the System Usability Scale (SUS) assessment. Thematic analysis was used to analyze field notes from the interviews.

RESULTS

A total of 7 CPs participated in the study, who perceived the system to have above-average usability (SUS score of 68.57). Nonetheless, the structured approach to usability testing unveiled specific functional and user interpretation issues, such as unnecessary information, lack of system clarity, and redundant data fields-critical insights not captured by the SUS results. Design elements like drop-down menus, free-text entry, checkboxes, and prefilled or auto-populated data fields were perceived as useful for enhancing system navigation and facilitating ADR reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

The user-centric design of technology solutions, like the one discussed herein, is crucial to meeting CPs' information needs and ensuring effective ADR reporting. Developers should adopt a structured approach to usability testing during the developmental phase to address identified issues comprehensively. Such a methodological approach may promote the adoption of ADR reporting systems by CPs and ultimately enhance patient safety.

Patterns of adverse drug reactions in Jordan: a retrospective analysis of the National Pharmacovigilance Data Registry (2015-2021)

BACKGROUND

Post-marketing surveillance of drugs is a cornerstone of pharmacovigilance. This study was conducted to characterize patterns of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) reported in Jordan.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

ADR reports submitted to the pharmacovigilance database of the Jordan Food and Drug Administration during 2015-2021 were retrospectively analyzed. The most commonly reported drugs, drug classes, ADRs, and ADRs consequences were explored. Logistic regression identified possible predictors of reporting serious ADRs.

RESULTS

A total of 2744 ADR reports were included, among which 28.4% were classified as serious. An annual increase in ADR reporting was observed. The most commonly implicated drug classes were antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents (24.0%), anti-infectives for systemic use (14.2%), and alimentary tract and metabolism (12.1%). Covid-19 vaccination was the most reported drug (22.8%). Fatigue (6.3%), injection site pain (6.1%), and headache (6.0%) were the top three common ADRs. Among ADRs with outcome information, 4.7% were fatal. Patient's age and intravenous medication use largely predicted reporting serious ADRs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides contemporary insights into the post-marketing surveillance of drugs in Jordan. The findings are foundational for future studies exploring drug-ADRs causality relationships. Efforts that promote pharmacovigilance concepts should be sustained and enhanced at the national level.

Linking Activity Theory Within User-Centered Design: Novel Framework to Inform Design and Evaluation of Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems in Pharmacy

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) may cause serious injuries including death. Timely reporting of ADRs may play a significant role in patient safety; however, underreporting exists. Enhancing the electronic communication of ADR information to regulators and between health care providers has the potential to reduce recurrent ADRs and improve patient safety.

OBJECTIVE

The main objectives were to explore the low rate of ADR reporting by community pharmacists (CPs) in Australia, evaluate the usability of an existing reporting system, and how this knowledge may influence the design of subsequent electronic ADR reporting systems.

METHODS

The study was carried out in 2 stages. Stage 1 involved qualitative semistructured interviews to identify CPs' perceived barriers and facilitators to ADR reporting. Data were analyzed by thematic analysis, and identified themes were subsequently aligned to the task-technology fit (TTF) framework. The second stage involved a usability evaluation of a commercial web-based ADR reporting system. A structured interview protocol that combined virtual observation, think-aloud moderating techniques, retrospective questioning of the overall user experience, and a System Usability Scale (SUS). The field notes from the interviews were subjected to thematic analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 12 CPs were interviewed in stage 1, and 7 CPs participated in stage 2. The interview findings show that CPs are willing to report ADRs but face barriers from environmental, organizational, and IT infrastructures. Increasing ADR awareness, improving workplace practices, and implementing user-focused electronic reporting systems were seen as facilitators of ADR reporting. User testing of an existing system resulted in above average usability (SUS 68.57); however, functional and user interpretation issues were identified. Design elements such as a drop-down menu, free-text entry, checkbox, and prefilled data fields were perceived to be extremely useful for navigating the system and facilitating ADR reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

Existing reporting systems are not suited to report ADRs, or adapted to workflow, and are rarely used by CPs. Our study uncovered important contextual information for the design of future ADR reporting interventions. Based on our study, a multifaceted, theory-guided, user-centered, and best practice approach to design, implementation, and evaluation may be critical for the successful adoption of ADR reporting electronic interventions and patient safety. Future studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of theory-driven frameworks used in the design and implementation of ADR reporting systems.

Which Adverse Events and Which Drugs Are Implicated in Drug-Related Hospital Admissions? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Adverse drug events (ADEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are leading causes of iatrogenic injury, which can result in emergency department (ED) visits or admissions to inpatient wards. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to provide up-to-date estimates of the prevalence of (preventable) drug-related ED visits and hospital admissions, as well as the type and prevalence of implicated ADRs/ADEs and drugs. A literature search of studies published between January 2012 and December 2021 was performed in PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Retrospective and prospective observational studies investigating acute admissions to EDs or inpatient wards due to ADRs or ADEs in the general population were included. Meta-analyses of prevalence rates were conducted using generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) with the random-effect method. Seventeen studies reporting ADRs and/or ADEs were eligible for inclusion. The prevalence rates of ADR- and ADE-related admissions to EDs or inpatient wards were estimated at 8.3% ([95% CI, 6.4-10.7%]) and 13.9% ([95% CI, 8.1-22.8%]), respectively, of which almost half (ADRs: 44.7% [95% CI: 28.1; 62.4]) and more than two thirds (ADEs: 71.0% [95% CI, 65.9-75.6%]) had been classified as at least possibly preventable. The ADR categories most frequently implicated in ADR-related admissions were gastrointestinal disorders, electrolyte disturbances, bleeding events, and renal and urinary disorders. Nervous system drugs were found to be the most commonly implicated drug groups, followed by cardiovascular and antithrombotic agents. Our findings demonstrate that ADR-related admissions to EDs and inpatient wards still represent a major and often preventable health care problem. In comparison to previous systematic reviews, cardiovascular and antithrombotic drugs remain common causes of drug-related admissions, while nervous system drugs appear to have become more commonly implicated. These developments may be considered in future efforts to improve medication safety in primary care.

Reporting, Monitoring, and Handling of Adverse Drug Reactions in Australia: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are unintended consequences of medication use and may result in hospitalizations or deaths. Timely reporting of ADRs to regulators is essential for drug monitoring, research, and maintaining patient safety, but it has not been standardized in Australia.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to explore the ways that ADRs are monitored or reported in Australia. We reviewed how consumers and health care professionals participate in ADR monitoring and reporting.

METHODS

The Arksey and O'Malley framework provided a methodology to sort the data according to key themes and issues. Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, PubMed, CINAHL, and Computer & Applied Sciences Complete databases were used to extract articles published from 2010 to 2021. Two reviewers screened the papers for eligibility, extracted key data, and provided descriptive analysis of the data.

RESULTS

Seven articles met the inclusion criteria. The Adverse Medicine Events Line (telephone reporting service) was introduced in 2003 to support consumer reporting of ADRs; however, only 10.4% of consumers were aware of ADR reporting schemes. Consumers who experience side effects were more likely to report ADRs to their doctors or pharmacists than to the drug manufacturer. The documentation of ADR reports in hospital electronic health records showed that nurses and pharmacists were significantly less likely than doctors to omit the description of the drug reaction, and pharmacists were significantly more likely to enter the correct classification of the drug reaction than doctors. Review and analysis of all ADR reports submitted to the Therapeutic Goods Administration highlighted a decline in physician contribution from 28% of ADR reporting in 2003 to 4% in 2016; however, within this same time period, hospital and community pharmacists were a major source of ADR reporting (ie, 16%). In 2014, there was an increase in ADR reporting by community pharmacists following the introduction of the GuildLink ADR web-based reporting system; however, a year later, the reporting levels dropped. In 2018, the Therapeutic Goods Administration introduced a black triangle scheme on the packaging of newly approved medicines, to remind and encourage ADR reporting on new medicines, but this was only marginally successful at increasing the quantity of ADR reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the existence of national and international guidelines for ADR reporting and management, there is substantial interinstitutional variability in the standards of ADR reporting among individual health care facilities. There is room for increased ADR reporting rates among consumers and health care professionals. A thorough assessment of the barriers and enablers to ADR reporting at the primary health care institutional levels is essential. Interventions to increase ADR reporting, for example, the black triangle scheme (alert or awareness) or GuildLink (digital health), have only had marginal effects and may benefit from further improvement revisions and awareness programs.

Findings on In Vitro Transporter-Mediated Drug Interactions and Their Follow-Up Actions for Labeling: Analysis of Drugs Approved by US FDA between 2017 and 2021

Understanding possible follow-up actions on in vitro findings helps determine the necessity of labeling for drug interactions. We analyzed information for in vitro findings on transporter-mediated interactions of drugs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research for the last five years (i.e., 2017–2021) and their follow-up actions for labeling. Higher R values than the pre-defined cut-off were observed with 3.7–39.1% inhibitor drugs in a simple prediction. Among these drugs, 16–41.7% were labeled with their potential drug interactions, while results of supporting studies or scientific rationales were submitted for the other drugs leading to no interaction labeling. In vitro transporter substrates were reported with 1.7–67.6% of drugs. The interaction labels for these substrate drugs were observed in up to 40% of drugs, while the other drugs were not labeled on the drug interactions with claims for their low interaction potential, evidenced by clinical studies or scientific rationales. The systematic and comprehensive analysis in this study will provide insight into the management of in vitro findings for transporter substrate or inhibitor drugs.

Adverse drug reaction reporting quality among different health professionals and the contribution of clinical pharmacists: A pilot study

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting is generally of poor quality, which may delay post-marketing regulatory actions. Here, we evaluated the quality of ADR reporting at our institution and examined the roles of clinical pharmacists in this process.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed ADR reports at our hospital between 2017 and 2019 to assess the number, source, drugs, and routes of administration. The quality assessment of ADR case reports form issued by the China Adverse Drug Reaction Monitoring Centre was used to assess the quality of ADR reports. Quality scores of ADR reports from pharmacists and nonpharmacists were assessed before and after review by clinical pharmacists.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Reports of adverse drug reaction reporting by healthcare professionals increased annually, with 59, 77 and 82 reports submitted in 2017, 2018 and 2019, respectively. The numbers of new or serious ADR reports by healthcare professionals in 2017, 2018, and 2019 were 5 (8.47%), 77 (11.69%) and 82 (10.98%), respectively. New or serious ADR reports accounted for approximately 10% (23/218) of all reported cases, and more than 70% (158/218) of the reports were from pharmacists. Systemic administration accounted for more than 80% (233/265) of adverse reactions, whereas ADRs due to topical drug use were rarely reported. The drugs that reportedly triggered ADRs were mainly antibacterial and patented Chinese medicines and accounted for more than half of all reported cases. The scores of ADR reports from pharmacists and nonpharmacists before modification by clinical pharmacists were 86.69 ± 8.12 and 68.36 ± 5.94, respectively, and the scores of ADR reports from pharmacists and nonpharmacists after modification by clinical pharmacists were 91.14 ± 6.64 and 90.02 ± 5.63, respectively.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

In a real-world setting, pharmacists are commonly responsible for most ADR reports. The quality of ADR reports from pharmacists and nonpharmacists before review did not reach the standard of excellence. An audit of clinical pharmacists may improve the overall quality of ADR reports. However, under-reporting of adverse reactions still occurs.

Drug-Related Hospital Admissions via the Department of Emergency Medicine: A Cross-Sectional Study From the Czech Republic

Background: Drug-related hospital admissions (DRAs) represent a significant problem affecting all countries worldwide. This study aimed to determine the prevalence and preventability of DRAs, identify the most common medications involved in DRAs, the most common clinical manifestations of DRAs and describe the preventability aspects of DRAs.

Methods: This cross-sectional study examined unplanned hospital admissions to the University Hospital Hradec Králové via the department of emergency medicine in August–November 2018. Data were obtained from electronic medical records. The methodology of DRA identification was adapted from the OPERAM DRA adjudication guide.

Results: Out of 1252 hospital admissions, 195 DRAs have been identified (145 related to treatment safety, 50 related to treatment effectiveness). The prevalence of DRAs was 15.6% (95% CI 13.6–17.6). The most common medication classes involved in DRAs related to treatment safety were Antithrombotic agents, Antineoplastic agents, Diuretics, Corticosteroids for systemic use, and Beta blocking agents. The most common medication classes involved in DRAs related to treatment effectiveness included Diuretics, Antithrombotic agents, Drugs used in diabetes, Agents acting on the renin-angiotensin system, and Lipid modifying agents. Gastrointestinal disorders were the leading causes of DRAs related to treatment safety, while Cardiac disorders were the leading causes of DRAs related to treatment effectiveness. The potential preventability of DRAs was 51%. The highest share of potential preventability in medication classes repeatedly involved in DRAs related to treatment safety was observed for Anti-inflammatory and antirheumatic products, Psycholeptics, and Drugs used in diabetes. Potentially preventable DRAs related to treatment safety were most commonly associated with inappropriate drug selection, inappropriate monitoring, inappropriate dose selection, and inappropriate lifestyle measures. On the contrary, DRAs related to treatment effectiveness were more commonly associated with medication nonadherence.

Conclusion: It should be emphasized that in most DRAs, medications were only a contributory reason of hospital admissions and that benefits and risks have to be carefully balanced. It is highlighted by the finding that the same medication classes (Antithrombotic agents and Diuretics) were among the most common medication classes involved in DRAs related to treatment safety and simultaneously in DRAs related to treatment effectiveness. The study highlighted that apart from problems related to prescribing, problems related to monitoring and patient-related problems represent significant preventability aspects.

Why hospital-based healthcare professionals do not report adverse drug reactions: a mixed methods study using the Theoretical Domains Framework

Purpose

Adverse drug reaction (ADR) underreporting is highly prevalent across the world. This study aimed to identify factors associated with ADR reporting and map these to a behavioural change framework to help inform future interventions designed to improve ADR underreporting.

Methods

A mixed methods survey was distributed to healthcare professionals at a tertiary hospital in Sydney, Australia. Quantitative data was analysed using logistic regression to identify factors that predict ADR reporting. Qualitative data was evaluated using content analysis. These were then integrated and mapped to the 14 domains within the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify target areas relevant for improving ADR reporting.

Results

One hundred thirty-three healthcare professionals completed the survey. Knowing how to report ADRs (OR 4.56, 95%CI 1.95–10.7), having been trained on ADR reporting (OR 2.72, 95%CI 1.29–5.77), and encountering ADRs as part of clinical practice (OR 10.3, 95%CI 3.59–29.4) were significant predictors of reporting an ADR. Content analysis identified three categories: modifying the ADR reporting process, enabling clinicians to report ADRs, and creating a positive ADR reporting culture. After data integration, the three target TDF domains were knowledge, environmental context/resources, and beliefs about consequences.

Conclusion

Future interventions designed to improve ADR reporting should address these target domains to instigate behaviour change in healthcare professionals’ reporting of ADRs.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00228-022-03326-x.

The Extent of Medication-Related Hospital Admissions in Australia: A Review from 1988 to 2021

Introduction

Medication-related problems often lead to patient harm. This paper aims to review the Australian literature to determine the overall incidence, severity and preventability of medication-related hospital admissions, as well as providing a national estimate on their extent and cost.

Methods

The first part of the paper includes a literature search to identify studies that provided estimates of medication-related problems that caused hospital admissions. Incidence of medication-related hospital admissions, type of medication-related problem contributing to admission (e.g. adverse medicine reaction) and method used to estimate incidence (e.g. chart review) were extracted. Data on severity and preventability of the admissions were extracted where available. The second part of the paper involves use of methodological triangulation to estimate the extent and cost of medication-related hospital admission. Median estimates used to assess medication-related hospital admissions and the 2019–2020 national hospital admissions data were used to calculate the national estimate on the extent of medication-related hospital admission. Costs were also estimated.

Results

Seventeen studies provided estimates on the extent of medication-related hospital admissions as assessed using medication chart review. The median incidence of 2.5% (interquartile range [IQR] 0.6%) as a proportion of all hospital admissions suggests 275,000 hospital admissions annually in Australia are medication related. The median incidence of 9% (IQR 3.9%) of emergency admissions suggests that 270,000 admissions annually are medication related. Eight studies provided estimates of the extent of medication-related hospital admissions identified from administrative health data; the median incidence of 1.7% with an under-reporting rate of 82% suggests 280,000 hospital admissions annually are medication related. Triangulation of results suggests that at least 250,000 hospital admissions annually in Australia are medication related, with an estimated cost of 1.4 billion Australian dollars (AUD$). Five studies assessed severity, and nine studies assessed preventability. Preventability estimates suggest two-thirds of medication-related hospital admissions are potentially preventable.

Conclusions

We estimated that 250,000 hospital admissions in Australia are medication related, with an annual cost of AUD$1.4 billion to the healthcare system. Two-thirds of medication-related hospital admissions are potentially preventable.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40264-021-01144-1.

An investigation of pharmacovigilance and reporting of adverse drug reactions in hospitals: a cross-sectional study in China

BACKGROUND

Pharmacovigilance is a science that plays a significant role in reducing ADRs and helps predict adverse reactions to drugs in community. To safely use drugs in treatment and prevention of disease, adverse drug reaction has been paid more attention.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the future needs of existing systems, the paper investigated the current state of pharmacovigilance and the reporting of ADR in Chinese hospitals.

METHODS

This cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study involved 10,063 pharmacists, doctors, and nurses from primary, secondary, and tertiary hospitals in all 31 provinces of China. It was commissioned by the National Centre for ADR Monitoring of China and conducted in March 2020. Three areas were assessed: sociodemographic characteristics of participants, awareness of the pharmacovigilance system, and the current state of hospitals' reporting of ADRs. Chi-square tests were used to calculate P values.

RESULTS

Health care professionals had heard the term "pharmacovigilance" previously (89.40%) and knew the reporting object (68.47%), content (65.94%), and range (64.83%) of pharmacovigilance. Most hospitals dispatched responsible professionals (87.64%) and departments (86.25%) to monitor ADR reporting. A total of 58.66% of tertiary medical, 45.25% of secondary, and 38.90% of primary hospitals extracted ADRs from a hospital information system. Moreover, 53.09% of tertiary medical, 38.93% of secondary, and 23.89% of primary hospitals had established a prescription automatic screening system to warn about risks for ADRs. Health care professionals' reports (99.92%) and patient feedback (77.99%) were included in most hospitals' ADR reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

Chinese health care professionals generally have good awareness of pharmacovigilance, and pharmacovigilance is relatively more advanced in China compared to other developing countries.