Literature DB >> 15269932

Under-reporting of serious adverse drug reactions in Sweden.

M Bäckström1, T Mjörndal, R Dahlqvist.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Adverse drug reactions (ADR) constitute a major problem, both from a medical point of view and as an economical burden. Spontaneous reporting of ADRs is one of the methods for post marketing surveillance of drug safety. Under-reporting can also provide an important obstacle to rapid and relevant signal detection. AIM: To investigate the rate of under-reporting serious ADRs of selected ICD 10 diagnoses.
METHOD: In order to investigate the under-reporting rate we investigated at five hospitals within the county of Norrbotten in Sweden the total number of diagnosed cases during a period of 5 years (1996-2000) with the following diagnoses: cerebral haemorrhage (I 61.0-I 61.9), pulmonary embolism (I 26.0 and I 26.9), embolism or thrombosis (I 74.0-I 74.9), phlebititis, thrombophlebitits or venous thrombosis (I 80.0-I 80.3, I 80.8 and I 80.9) and portal vein thrombosis and other thrombosis or emboli (I 82.0-I 82.3, I 82.8 and I 82.9). The identity of these patients was obtained through a database search. The patients' case records were then scrutinized by a specially trained nurse and the drugs used at the time of the event were noted. An assessment of the possibility of an ADR was performed using standard WHO causality criteria. Later, database search in the Swedish ADR registry was performed in order to investigate whether these suspected ADRs had been reported to the national authority in Sweden or not.
RESULTS: In total 1349 case records were found and scrutinized. Of these, 107 patients had received drugs that could have been a probable or possible cause to the diagnoses. Of these 92 cases had not been reported and only 15 patients were found in the database, giving an overall under-reporting rate of all ADRs of 86%. The most commonly occurring diagnoses were cerebral haemorrhage followed by venous thrombosis, 545 and 468 respectively. Among those cases that should have been reported according to the existing rules for spontaneous reporting of suspected ADRs the most frequently occurring diagnosis was cerebral haemorrhage (I 61.0) in connection to treatment with anticoagulants.
CONCLUSION: The rate of spontaneous ADR reporting is very low, also for serious and fatal reactions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15269932     DOI: 10.1002/pds.962

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf        ISSN: 1053-8569            Impact factor:   2.890


  44 in total

1.  A prospective analysis of the preventability of adverse drug reactions reported in Sweden.

Authors:  Henrik Lövborg; Linda Ring Eriksson; Anna K Jönsson; Thomas Bradley; Staffan Hägg
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2012-02-19       Impact factor: 2.953

2.  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

3.  Influence of pharmacists' attitudes on adverse drug reaction reporting : a case-control study in Portugal.

Authors:  Maria T Herdeiro; Adolfo Figueiras; Jorge Polónia; J J Gestal-Otero
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 5.606

4.  A small economic inducement to stimulate increased reporting of adverse drug reactions--a way of dealing with an old problem?

Authors:  M Bäckström; T Mjörndal
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2006-03-30       Impact factor: 2.953

5.  Using a capture-recapture method to assess the frequency of adverse drug reactions in a French university hospital.

Authors:  Stephanie Lugardon; Karine Desboeuf; Pierre Fernet; Jean-Louis Montastruc; Maryse Lapeyre-Mestre
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.335

6.  Comparison of hospital episodes with 'drug-induced' disorders and spontaneously reported adverse drug reactions.

Authors:  Paul Barrow; Patrick Waller; Lesley Wise
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 4.335

7.  Adverse drug reaction reporting by nurses in Sweden.

Authors:  M Bäckström; Elisabet Ekman; T Mjörndal
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2007-04-03       Impact factor: 2.953

8.  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

9.  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

10.  Risk perception and reasons for noncompliance in pharmacovigilance: a qualitative study conducted in Canada.

Authors:  Vincent Nichols; Isabelle Thériault-Dubé; Julie Touzin; Jean-François Delisle; Denis Lebel; Jean-François Bussières; Benoît Bailey; Johanne Collin
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 5.606

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.