Literature DB >> 14583065

Stimulating adverse drug reaction reporting: effect of a drug safety bulletin and of including yellow cards in prescription pads.

Josep Maria Castel1, Albert Figueras, Consuelo Pedrós, Joan-Ramon Laporte, Dolors Capellà.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of voluntary reporting systems in pharmacovigilance highly depends on the number of assembled reports. AIM: The aim of this study was to measure the effect of the periodical distribution of a bulletin on drug safety issues and of including yellow cards in prescription pads on the rate of adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The Catalan Centre of Pharmacovigilance began its activities at the end of 1982. Since 1985, an ADR bulletin (ADRB) has been mailed approximately quarterly to all physicians in its catchment area, with one yellow card enclosed. Additionally, from 1991-1994, a yellow card was included in the prescription pads of the Catalan Health Service. Time series methodology, with adjustment of the monthly number of reports to an Auto-Regressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) model, was used to evaluate the effect of these two measures.
RESULTS: From January 1983-October 1995, 6240 spontaneous ADR reports were received, and 41 issues of the ADRB were sent out. Initially, the mean monthly spontaneous ADR reporting rate was 34.4 (SD = 14.1; n = 106 months). After the inclusion of yellow cards in prescription pads, the mean monthly spontaneous ADR reporting rate increased to 53.9 (SD = 14.4; n = 48 months). According to an ARIMA model, when a bulletin was send out (MONTH1), a mean increase of 9.4 reports was produced in that month, plus 12.3 additional reports in the following month (MONTH2), and 6.3 in the second month after sending the ADRB (MONTH3). A yellow card in the prescription pads elicits a monthly mean increase of 19.8 in the number of reports.
CONCLUSIONS: The present study suggests that ADRBs elicit a temporal increase of the ADR reporting rate. Including a yellow card in prescription pads was followed by an even greater increase in the reporting rate, possibly because it guarantees that yellow cards are available at the workplace.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14583065     DOI: 10.2165/00002018-200326140-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Drug Saf        ISSN: 0114-5916            Impact factor:   5.606


  4 in total

1.  Stimulating reporting of adverse drug reactions by using a fee.

Authors:  J Feely; S Moriarty; P O'Connor
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1990-01-06

2.  Box-Jenkins modelling in medical research.

Authors:  U Helfenstein
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 3.021

3.  Attitude survey of adverse drug-reaction reporting by health care professionals across the European Union. The European Pharmacovigilance Research Group.

Authors:  K J Belton
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 2.953

4.  The individual over time: time series applications in health care research.

Authors:  B F Crabtree; S C Ray; P M Schmidt; P J O'Connor; D D Schmidt
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 6.437

  4 in total
  18 in total

1.  Underreporting in pharmacovigilance: an intervention for Italian GPs (Emilia-Romagna region).

Authors:  Chiara Biagi; Nicola Montanaro; Elena Buccellato; Giuseppe Roberto; Alberto Vaccheri; Domenico Motola
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2012-06-17       Impact factor: 2.953

2.  Workshop- and telephone-based interventions to improve adverse drug reaction reporting: a cluster-randomized trial in Portugal.

Authors:  Maria Teresa Herdeiro; Inês Ribeiro-Vaz; Mónica Ferreira; Jorge Polónia; Amílcar Falcão; Adolfo Figueiras
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2012-08-01       Impact factor: 5.606

3.  Physicians' attitudes and adverse drug reaction reporting : a case-control study in Portugal.

Authors:  Maria T Herdeiro; Adolfo Figueiras; Jorge Polónia; Juan Jesus Gestal-Otero
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 5.606

4.  Hospital-based adverse drug reaction bulletin : an Indian experience.

Authors:  Jimmy Jose; Padma G M Rao; Beena Jimmy
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 5.606

5.  Reporting of adverse drug reactions may be influenced by feedback to the reporting doctor.

Authors:  Susanna M Wallerstedt; Gertrud Brunlöf; Marie-Louise Johansson; Carina Tukukino; Lars Ny
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2007-03-09       Impact factor: 2.953

Review 6.  Determinants of under-reporting of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review.

Authors:  Elena Lopez-Gonzalez; Maria T Herdeiro; Adolfo Figueiras
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 5.606

7.  An intervention to improve spontaneous adverse drug reaction reporting by hospital physicians: a time series analysis in Spain.

Authors:  Consuelo Pedrós; Antoni Vallano; Gloria Cereza; Gemma Mendoza-Aran; Antònia Agustí; Cristina Aguilera; Immaculada Danés; Xavier Vidal; Josep M Arnau
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 5.606

8.  Effects of e-mails containing ADR information and a current case report on ADR reporting rate and quality of reports.

Authors:  Marie-Louise Johansson; Gertrud Brunlöf; Christina Edward; Susanna M Wallerstedt
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2009-01-07       Impact factor: 2.953

9.  Perceptions of doctors to adverse drug reaction reporting in a teaching hospital in Lagos, Nigeria.

Authors:  Kazeem A Oshikoya; Jacob O Awobusuyi
Journal:  BMC Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2009-08-11

10.  Information and feedback to improve occupational physicians' reporting of occupational diseases: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Annet F Lenderink; Dick Spreeuwers; Jac J L van der Klink; Frank J H van Dijk
Journal:  Int Arch Occup Environ Health       Date:  2009-10-15       Impact factor: 3.015

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.