Signals of adverse drug reactions communicated by pharmacovigilance stakeholders: protocol for a scoping review of the global literature

Signals of Adverse Drug Reactions Communicated by Pharmacovigilance Stakeholders: A Scoping Review of the Global Literature

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Signals of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) can be supported by reports of ADRs and by interventional and non-interventional studies. The evidence base and features of ADR reports that are used to support signals remain to be comprehensively described. To this end, we have undertaken a scoping review.

METHODS

We searched the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, without language or time restrictions. We also hand searched the bibliographies of relevant studies. We included studies of any design if the results were described as signals. We assessed the levels of evidence using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM) criteria and coded features of reports of ADRs using the Bradford Hill guidelines.

RESULTS

Overall, 1974 publications reported 2421 studies of signals; 1683/2421 were clinical assessments of anecdotal reports of ADRs, but only 225 (13%) of these included explicit judgments on which features of the ADR reports were supportive of a signal. These 225 studies yielded 228 signals; these were supported by features, which were: 'experimental evidence' (i.e., positive dechallenge or rechallenge, 154 instances [68%]), 'temporality' (i.e., time to onset, 130 [57%]), 'exclusion of competing causes' (49 [21%]), and others (40 [17%]). Positive dechallenge/rechallenge often co-occurred with temporality (77/228). OCEBM 4 (i.e., case series and case-control studies) was the most frequent level of evidence (2078 studies). Between 2013 and 2019, there was a three-fold increase in clinical assessments of reports of ADRs compared with a less than two-fold increase in studies supported by higher levels of evidence (i.e., OCEBM 1-3). We identified an increased rate between 2013 and 2019 in disproportionality analyses (about 15 studies per year), mostly from academia.

CONCLUSIONS

Most signals were supported by temporality and dechallenge/rechallenge, but clear reporting of judgments on causality remains infrequent. The number of studies supported only by anecdotal reports of ADRs increased from year to year. The impact of a growing number of signals of disproportionate reporting communicated without an accompanying clinical assessment should be evaluated.

Pharmacovigilance education to healthcare professionals: Will it affect their performance in reporting adverse drug reactions?

AIM

To assess impact of pharmacovigilance (PV) educational program on knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) of healthcare professionals (HCPs).

METHODS

a prospective study was conducted on HCPs at an Egyptian hospital. The study included: pre-education phase; where KAP questionnaire was administered by HCPs to obtain baseline data, intervention phase; where educational sessions were held by clinical pharmacists and Egyptian PV centre, and post-education phase; where the questionnaire was re-administered by participants 9 months post-receiving educational sessions. The questionnaire comprised five sections: participants' demographics, knowledge, attitude and practice sections and two multiple choice questions asking about the importance of establishment of ADRs monitoring centre, and factors hindering ADRs reporting. Pre-education and post-education data were compared.

RESULTS

From 221 HCPs invited to participate, only 153 filled the pre-education and post-education questionnaires. At baseline, the median (range) of the total KAP score were 1 (0-7), 1 (0-4) and 4 (0-14) for physicians, nurses and pharmacists, respectively. All KAP scores were low for all HCPs at baseline with the pharmacists having significantly higher knowledge and attitude scores compared with physicians, and nurses (P < .001). After education, all scores significantly increased and 13 ADRs were reported by HCPs compared with only 2 at baseline.

CONCLUSION

It was concluded that educational program had a significant impact on enhancing KAP of HCPs towards PV and ADRs reporting.