Adverse drug reactions reported for systemic antibacterials in Danish children over a decade

Pharmacovigilance Strategies to Address Resistance to Antibiotics and Inappropriate Use-A Narrative Review

The spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global challenge. Close and continuous surveillance for quick detection of AMR can be difficult, especially in remote places. This narrative review focuses on the contributions of pharmacovigilance (PV) as an auxiliary tool for identifying and monitoring the ineffectiveness, resistance, and inappropriate use of antibiotics (ABs). The terms "drug ineffective", "therapeutic failure", "drug resistance", "pathogen resistance", and "multidrug resistance" were found in PV databases and dictionaries, denoting ineffectiveness. These terms cover a range of problems that should be better investigated because they are useful in warning about possible causes of AMR. "Medication errors", especially those related to dose and indication, and "Off-label use" are highlighted in the literature, suggesting inappropriate use of ABs. Hence, the included studies show that the terms of interest related to AMR and use are not only present but frequent in PV surveillance programs. This review illustrates the feasibility of using PV as a complementary tool for antimicrobial stewardship activities, especially in scenarios where other resources are scarce.

Pharmacovigilance and incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized pediatric patients: a mini systematic review

Background

Pharmacovigilance is an identifying and responding process against an adverse drug reaction (ADRs) problem encountered in the drug administration. ADRs are among the common reasons for morbidity and fatality in pediatrics throughout the globe.

Main body

A systemic review of the previous 10 years (2010–2019) published studies were taken into consideration to describe observational studies on ADRs and to determine the incidence and characteristics of ADRs in pediatrics. Electronic relevant literature was searched in PMC, PubMed, Google Scholar, and OvidSP databases using MESH heading and text words. The titles, text, and abstracts were checked for patients below 18 years of age, nature of ADRs, observational studies (prospective or retrospective), and maximum information was recorded to count their frequency. The studies which discussed specific or particular drug exposures were not selected in this review. Of the 36,689 titles retrieved, 27 studies were selected for full-text review. Ten observational studies were added in the final review. Observational studies on pediatric were carried out in seven distinct nations. The predominant study design within observational methodological studies was prospective (n = 5, 50%). The overall average occurrence of ADRs incidence was 9.52%. ADRs reporting in male patients (54.6%) were more than females (45.4%). The severe types of ADRs were reported in four studies. Anti-microbials were the most common class of drugs related to ADRs.

Conclusion

This systematic review reveals that ADRs in pediatrics are serious public health problems. Periodic drug surveillance studies are mandatory for the safe and appropriate usage of medicines in pediatrics.

The practice of off label prescribing and associated adverse drug reactions in pediatric inpatients in a tertiary care hospital in India

Objectives

To assess the extent of use, patterns, variables and Adverse Drug Reactions associated with off label prescribing in Pediatrics.

Methods

A prospective observational study was conducted for a period of 6 months for children of the age group 0-17 years in a tertiary care Hospital in Maharashtra, India. Off label drug use was assessed using Micromedex and British National Formulary for Children (BNFC 2016–2017). Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) were assessed according to the physicians' notes, recorded during the patient's hospital stay. Pearson correlation coefficient was computed to assess the relationship between age and the number of off-label drugs. Odds ratio was calculated for the occurrence of ADRs in on-label prescriptions Vs off label-prescriptions. A P value of <0.05 was considered as significant.

Key findings

A total of 1514 prescriptions were evaluated in 300 patients. Out of which 542 (35.79%) and 423 (27.9%) were off label according to Micromedex and BNFC respectively. The number of patients who received at least one off label was found to be 225 (75%) – Micromedex and 223 (74.3%) – BNFC Unspecified indication and use of drugs outside the specified age limit were identified as the main variables associated with off label prescribing. Highest proportion of off-label drugs was found in Alimentary system. A total of 35 ADRs (OR 6.92 CI 95%(OR 6.92, 95% CI, 3.13-15.27)) were identified in 31 patients.

Conclusions

Off-label drug use is prevalent in the pediatric population and warrants an evidence-based approach to improve prescribing practices in pediatrics.

Methylphenidate for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents - assessment of adverse events in non-randomised studies

BACKGROUND

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder in childhood. The psychostimulant methylphenidate is the most frequently used medication to treat it. Several studies have investigated the benefits of methylphenidate, showing possible favourable effects on ADHD symptoms, but the true magnitude of the effect is unknown. Concerning adverse events associated with the treatment, our systematic review of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) demonstrated no increase in serious adverse events, but a high proportion of participants suffered a range of non-serious adverse events.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the adverse events associated with methylphenidate treatment for children and adolescents with ADHD in non-randomised studies.

SEARCH METHODS

In January 2016, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, 12 other databases and two trials registers. We also checked reference lists and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included non-randomised study designs. These comprised comparative and non-comparative cohort studies, patient-control studies, patient reports/series and cross-sectional studies of methylphenidate administered at any dosage or formulation. We also included methylphenidate groups from RCTs assessing methylphenidate versus other interventions for ADHD as well as data from follow-up periods in RCTs. Participants had to have an ADHD diagnosis (from the 3rd to the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or the 9th or 10th edition of theInternational Classification of Diseases, with or without comorbid diagnoses. We required that at least 75% of participants had a normal intellectual capacity (intelligence quotient of more than 70 points) and were aged below 20 years. We excluded studies that used another ADHD drug as a co-intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Fourteen review authors selected studies independently. Two review authors assessed risk of bias independently using the ROBINS-I tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. All review authors extracted data. We defined serious adverse events according to the International Committee of Harmonization as any lethal, life-threatening or life-changing event. We considered all other adverse events to be non-serious adverse events and conducted meta-analyses of data from comparative studies. We calculated meta-analytic estimates of prevalence from non-comparative cohorts studies and synthesised data from patient reports/series qualitatively. We investigated heterogeneity by conducting subgroup analyses, and we also conducted sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 260 studies: 7 comparative cohort studies, 6 of which compared 968 patients who were exposed to methylphenidate to 166 controls, and 1 which assessed 1224 patients that were exposed or not exposed to methylphenidate during different time periods; 4 patient-control studies (53,192 exposed to methylphenidate and 19,906 controls); 177 non-comparative cohort studies (2,207,751 participants); 2 cross-sectional studies (96 participants) and 70 patient reports/series (206 participants). Participants' ages ranged from 3 years to 20 years. Risk of bias in the included comparative studies ranged from moderate to critical, with most studies showing critical risk of bias. We evaluated all non-comparative studies at critical risk of bias. The GRADE quality rating of the evidence was very low.Primary outcomesIn the comparative studies, methylphenidate increased the risk ratio (RR) of serious adverse events (RR 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17 to 1.57; 2 studies, 72,005 participants); any psychotic disorder (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.57; 1 study, 71,771 participants); and arrhythmia (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.48 to 1.74; 1 study, 1224 participants) compared to no intervention.In the non-comparative cohort studies, the proportion of participants on methylphenidate experiencing any serious adverse event was 1.20% (95% CI 0.70% to 2.00%; 50 studies, 162,422 participants). Withdrawal from methylphenidate due to any serious adverse events occurred in 1.20% (95% CI 0.60% to 2.30%; 7 studies, 1173 participants) and adverse events of unknown severity led to withdrawal in 7.30% of participants (95% CI 5.30% to 10.0%; 22 studies, 3708 participants).Secondary outcomesIn the comparative studies, methylphenidate, compared to no intervention, increased the RR of insomnia and sleep problems (RR 2.58, 95% CI 1.24 to 5.34; 3 studies, 425 participants) and decreased appetite (RR 15.06, 95% CI 2.12 to 106.83; 1 study, 335 participants).With non-comparative cohort studies, the proportion of participants on methylphenidate with any non-serious adverse events was 51.2% (95% CI 41.2% to 61.1%; 49 studies, 13,978 participants). These included difficulty falling asleep, 17.9% (95% CI 14.7% to 21.6%; 82 studies, 11,507 participants); headache, 14.4% (95% CI 11.3% to 18.3%; 90 studies, 13,469 participants); abdominal pain, 10.7% (95% CI 8.60% to 13.3%; 79 studies, 11,750 participants); and decreased appetite, 31.1% (95% CI 26.5% to 36.2%; 84 studies, 11,594 participants). Withdrawal of methylphenidate due to non-serious adverse events occurred in 6.20% (95% CI 4.80% to 7.90%; 37 studies, 7142 participants), and 16.2% were withdrawn for unknown reasons (95% CI 13.0% to 19.9%; 57 studies, 8340 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that methylphenidate may be associated with a number of serious adverse events as well as a large number of non-serious adverse events in children and adolescents, which often lead to withdrawal of methylphenidate. Our certainty in the evidence is very low, and accordingly, it is not possible to accurately estimate the actual risk of adverse events. It might be higher than reported here.Given the possible association between methylphenidate and the adverse events identified, it may be important to identify people who are most susceptible to adverse events. To do this we must undertake large-scale, high-quality RCTs, along with studies aimed at identifying responders and non-responders.

Oral and Topical Antibiotics for Clinically Infected Eczema in Children: A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial in Ambulatory Care

PURPOSE

Eczema may flare because of bacterial infection, but evidence supporting antibiotic treatment is of low quality. We aimed to determine the effect of oral and topical antibiotics in addition to topical emollient and corticosteroids in children with clinically infected eczema.

METHODS

We employed a 3-arm, blinded, randomized controlled trial in UK ambulatory care. Children with clinical, non-severely infected eczema were randomized to receive oral and topical placebos (control), oral antibiotic (flucloxacillin) and topical placebo, or topical antibiotic (fusidic acid) and oral placebo, for 1 week. We compared Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) scores at 2 weeks using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA).

RESULTS

We randomized 113 children (40 to control, 36 to oral antibiotic, and 37 to topical antibiotic). Mean (SD) baseline Patient Oriented Eczema Measure scores were 13.4 (5.1) for the control group, 14.6 (5.3) for the oral antibiotic group, and 16.9 (5.5) for the topical antibiotic group. At baseline, 104 children (93%) had 1 or more of the following findings: weeping, crusting, pustules, or painful skin. Mean (SD) POEM scores at 2 weeks were 6.2 (6.0) for control, 8.3 (7.3) for the oral antibiotic group, and 9.3 (6.2) for the topical antibiotic group. Controlling for baseline POEM score, neither oral nor topical antibiotics produced a significant difference in mean (95% CI) POEM scores (1.5 [-1.4 to 4.4] and 1.5 [-1.6 to 4.5] respectively). There were no significant differences in adverse effects and no serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

We found rapid resolution in response to topical steroid and emollient treatment and ruled out a clinically meaningful benefit from the addition of either oral or topical antibiotics. Children seen in ambulatory care with mild clinically infected eczema do not need treatment with antibiotics.

A study of antimicrobial use in children admitted to pediatric medicine ward of a tertiary care hospital

OBJECTIVES

Antimicrobials are frequently used in tertiary care hospitals. We conducted an observational study on children admitted to a teaching hospital in Eastern India, to generate a profile of antimicrobial use and suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) attributable to them.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Hospitalized children of either sex, aged between 1 month and 12 years, were studied. Baseline demographic and clinical features, duration of hospital stay, antimicrobials received in hospital along with dosing and indications and details of suspected ADRs attributable to their use were recorded. Every patient was followed up till discharge, admission to the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, or death.

RESULTS

Over the 1 year study period, 332 admissions were screened. The prevalence of antimicrobial use was 79.82%. The majority of the 265 children who received antimicrobials were males (61.10%) and hailed from rural and low socioeconomic background. Median age was 36 months. Six children died, 43 were transferred out, and the rest discharged. In most instances, either 2 (40%) or a single antibiotic (39.6%) was used. Ceftriaxone, co-amoxiclav, amikacin, vancomycin, and ampicillin were predominantly used. Antivirals, antimalarials, and antiprotozoals were used occasionally. Average number of antimicrobials per patient was 2.0 ± 1.27; the majority (84.1%) were by parenteral route and initial choice was usually empirical. Prescriptions were usually in generic name. The antimicrobial treatment ranged between 1 and 34 days, with a median of 7 days. Six ADRs were noted of which half were skin rash and the rest loose stools.

CONCLUSIONS

The profile of antimicrobial use is broadly similar to earlier Indian studies. Apparent overuse of multiple antimicrobials per prescription and the parenteral route requires exploration. Antimicrobials are being used empirically in the absence of policy. ADRs to antimicrobials are occasional and usually mild. The baseline data can serve in situation analysis for antibiotic prescribing guidelines.

Detection of adverse drug reactions by medication antidote signals and comparison of their sensitivity with common methods of ADR detection

OBJECTIVE

To determine the PPVs of selected ten medication antidote signals in recognizing potential ADRs and comparison of their sensitivity with manual chart analysis, and voluntary reporting recognizing the same ADRs.

METHOD

The inpatient EMR database of internal medicine department was utilized for a period of one year, adult patients prescribed at least one of the ten signals, were included in the study, recipient patients of antidote signals were assessed for the occurrence of an ADR by Naranjo's tool of ADR evaluation. PPVs of each antidote signal were verified.

RESULT

PPV of Methylprednisolone and Phytonadione was 0.28, Metoclopramide and Potassium Chloride - 0.29, Dextrose 50%, Promethazine, Sodium Polystyrene and Loperamide - 0.30, Protamine and Acetylcysteine - 0.33. In comparison of confirmed ADRs of antidote signals with other methods, Dextrose 50%, Metoclopramide, Sodium Polystyrene, Potassium Chloride, Methylprednisolone and Promethazine seem to be extremely significant (P value > 0.0001), while ADRs of Phytonadione, Protamine, Acetylcysteine and Loperamide were insignificant.

CONCLUSION

Antidote medication signals have definitive discerning evaluation value of ADRs over routine methods of ADR detection with a high detection rate with a minimum cost; Their integration with hospital EMR database and routine patient safety surveillance enhances transparency, time-saving and facilitates ADR detection.

Iatrogenic neurology

Iatrogenic disease is one of the most frequent causes of hospital admissions and constitutes a growing public health problem. The most common type of iatrogenic neurologic disease is pharmacologic, and the central and peripheral nervous systems are particularly vulnerable. Despite this, iatrogenic disease is generally overlooked as a differential diagnosis among neurologic patients. The clinical picture of pharmacologically mediated iatrogenic neurologic disease can range from mild to fatal. Common and uncommon forms of drug toxicity are comprehensively addressed in this chapter. While the majority of neurologic adverse effects are listed and referenced in the tables, the most relevant issues are further discussed in the text.

Comparative epidemiology of hospital-acquired adverse drug reactions in adults and children and their impact on cost and hospital stay--a systematic review

PURPOSE

To study and analyze the comparative impact of hospital-acquired adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in adult and pediatric patients in terms of the economic implications, (length of) hospital stay, and salient features in relation to the incidence rate, severity, morbidity, mortality, and preventability of the ADRs.

METHODS

A systematic search to identify and retrieve relevant articles/studies in the PubMed, Medline, Scopus, MEDPAR, and Cochrane databases and by the Google search engine was performed for the study period 2000 to April 2013. In total, 51 studies were identified on patients hospitalized for ADRs, and these were included in the study. The incidence rate of ADRs, their severity, mortality, morbidity, preventability, cost, and association with extended hospital stay due to ADRs were extracted and scrutinized.

RESULTS

Hospital-acquired ADRs are more widely studied in adults than in children, and the incidence rate is higher in the former. However, a wide variation in the incidence rate worldwide is observed in both groups. Irrespective of the ages of patients, ADRs are among the most frequent causes of morbidity and mortality. Interestingly, preventable ADRs are more frequently observed in patients at the younger and older ends of the age spectrum. Hospital-acquired ADRs place an immense economic burden on healthcare systems, with the overall cost for a hospitalized patient with an ADR reported to be $2,401 per patient, which is equivalent to a 19.86 % additional increase in the total cost of care and an increase in average length of hospital stay of 8.25 %.

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings of this review, we suggest that excellent assertive measures of pharmacovigilance with the aim to diminish the incidence rate of hospital-acquired ADRs and support the development of interventions are needed to promote vital facets of drug safety with an overall objective to avert potential ADRs.

Adverse drug reactions in hospitalized pediatric patients of Saudi Arabian University Hospital and impact of pharmacovigilance in reporting ADR

OBJECTIVES

Children are more vulnerable to ADRs, and this susceptibility is compounded due to hospitalization. There is a lack of local data regarding the potential risk of ADRs in hospitalized pediatric patients. Therefore, this study is designed to identify the frequent nature, severity of adverse drug reactions, drugs implicated and factors influencing ADRs.

METHODS

Intensive monitoring study of ADRs was done in hospitalized pediatric patients of King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah from January to December 2011, with an analogous retrospective study for the preceding year to determine incidence rate, demographic aspects, causality appraisal, polypharmacy, body organs/systems involved and drugs implicated in ADR. Comparison of the two data was done to determine the impact of pharmacovigilance.

RESULTS

Incidence rate of ADRs in retrospective study was (4.50%) and (8.2%) in prospective study. ADR was more in patients who received 5-6 drugs, which was (15.5%) in retrospective study and (22.1%) in prospective study. Regarding age, it was the highest in patients of 0-1 year of age which was (40.7%) in retrospective study and (38.8%) in prospective study. Anti-infective agents were the most frequently involved in ADR (40.8%) in prospective study and (48.2%) and retrospective study. This study also demonstrated that, there was high susceptibility of the skin to the ADR which was (37%) in retrospective study and (42.9%) in prospective study. None of the ADRs proved to be fatal.

CONCLUSION

Well premeditated intensive monitoring approach in pharmacovigilance amplifies the ADR detection, which can persuade healthcare providers into more drug safety.

A study of adverse drug reactions in pediatric patients

Aim:

To study the adverse drug reaction (ADR) pattern in a pediatric population in a tertiary care hospital.

Materials and Methods:

An observational study was done in the department of pediatrics in a tertiary care hospital. The ADRs occurring in the inpatient wards and outpatient department of pediatrics were actively monitored. The collected reports were analyzed for ADR pattern, drug groups, demographic profile, causality, severity, and preventability of the ADR.

Results:

A total of 30 ADRs were documented during the mid period of 2009 among pediatric patients. Most of the ADRs (60%) occurred below the age of 1 year. Antibiotics comprised the major group of drugs causing ADRs (67%). Rashes and urticaria were the most common type of ADR (37%) followed by fever, anaphylactic shock, vomiting, chills, and rigors. A single case of death had been reported in the study period. There were more occurrences of ADRs with multiple drugs compared to single drug therapy. About 80% of the ADRs were of probable causality and 87% were of probable preventability. There were no mild reactions, with 77% of reactions being moderate and 23% of reactions being severe in the severity scale.

Conclusions:

ADRs occur more among infants and antibiotics were more commonly implicated. Most of the reactions were of moderate severity. This indicates the need for a rigid ADR monitoring among pediatric patients to ensure safety of drug therapy.

Adverse events following immunization in children: retrospective analysis of spontaneous reports over a decade

PURPOSE

There is no doubt that paediatric immunization prevents serious diseases, but the administration of these vaccines to healthy children also involves risks of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), some of which are potentially serious. The current body of evidence on ADRs from immunization therapy at the population level is partly contradictory across countries, time periods and childhood immunization programmes. The objective of our study was to characterize reported adverse events (AEFIs) following immunization in Danish children.

METHODS

Adverse events (AEFIs) in 0- to 17-year-old children and adolescents reported to the Danish Medicines Agency (DKMA) between 1998 and 2007 were analysed. The unit of analysis was one AEFI. Data were categorized with respect to time, age, and gender of the children, suspected vaccines, category and seriousness of the AEFIs, and reporting rate.

RESULTS

During the study period, the DKMA received 1,365 reports covering 2,600 AEFIs, corresponding to 60% of all adverse events reported for children. One third of the AEFIs were classified as serious, and two deaths were reported. The annual number of serious AEFIs remained constant during the study period. Approximately 80% of AEFIs were reported in children aged 0-2 years. Of all reported AEs, 45% were in the category "general disorders and administration site conditions", followed by the categories "skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders" (20% of total AEFIs) and "nervous system disorders" (16% of total AEFIs). The largest share of serious events was from the category "nervous system disorders" (33% of serious AEFIs). The most frequently reported serious AEs were febrile convulsions, pyrexia, and injection-site reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

In Denmark, a large number of AEFIs following paediatric immunization have been reported, but the majority of cases were non-serious.