Literature DB >> 20573089

Correlates of spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions within primary care: the paradox of low prescribers who are high reporters.

Anthony R Cox1, Christopher Anton, Sarah E McDowell, John F Marriott, Robin E Ferner.   

Abstract

AIM(S): To examine Primary Care Trust (PCT) demographics influencing general practitioner (GP) involvement in pharmacovigilance.
METHODS: PCT adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports to the Yellow Card scheme between April 2004 and March 2006 were obtained for the UK West Midlands region. Reports were analysed by all drugs, and most commonly reported drugs ('top drugs'). PCT data, adjusted for population size, were aggregated. Prescribing statistics and other characteristics were obtained for each PCT, and associations between these characteristics and ADR reporting rates were examined.
RESULTS: During 2004-06, 1175 reports were received from PCTs. Two hundred and eighty (24%) of these reports were for 14 'top drugs'. The mean rate of reporting for PCTs was 213 reports per million population. A total of 153 million items were prescribed during 2004-06, of which 33% were 'top drugs'. Reports for all drugs and 'top drugs' were inversely correlated with the number of prescriptions issued per thousand population (r(s)=-0.413, 95% CI -0.673, -0.062, P < 0.05, and r=-0.420, 95% CI -0.678, -0.071, P < 0.05, respectively). Reporting was significantly negatively correlated with the percentages of male GPs within a PCT, GPs over 55 years of age, single-handed GPs within a PCT, the average list size of a GP within a PCT, the overall deprivation scores and average QOF total points. ADR reports did not correlate significantly with the proportion of the population over 65 years old.
CONCLUSIONS: Some PCT characteristics appear to be associated with low levels of ADR reporting. The association of low prescribing areas with high ADR reporting rates replicates previous findings.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20573089      PMCID: PMC2856054          DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2010.03637.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 0306-5251            Impact factor:   4.335


  9 in total

1.  Diffusion of new drugs in Danish general practice.

Authors:  F H Steffensen; H T Sørensen; F Olesen
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 2.267

2.  The adoption of new drugs by doctors practising in group and solo practice.

Authors:  P M Williamson
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1975 Apr-May       Impact factor: 4.634

3.  An assessment of the publicly disseminated evidence of safety used in decisions to withdraw medicinal products from the UK and US markets.

Authors:  Andrea Clarke; Jonathan J Deeks; Saad A W Shakir
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 5.606

4.  The nature of the scientific evidence leading to drug withdrawals for pharmacovigilance reasons in France.

Authors:  Pascale Olivier; Jean-Louis Montastruc
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 2.890

5.  The House of Commons Health Committee: 'The Influence of the Pharmaceutical Industry'. Too much too late?

Authors:  Robert Kerwin
Journal:  J Psychopharmacol       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 4.153

6.  The influence of primary care prescribing rates for new drugs on spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions.

Authors:  Richard C Clark; Simon R J Maxwell; Sheena Kerr; Melinda Cuthbert; Duncan Buchanan; Doug Steinke; David J Webb; Nicholas D Bateman
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 5.606

7.  Prescriber adoption of newly approved selective COX-2 inhibitors.

Authors:  Deborah Layton; Patrick C Souverein; Eibert R Heerdink; Saad A W Shakir; A G C Egberts
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 2.890

8.  Prescriber profile and post-marketing surveillance.

Authors:  W Inman; G Pearce
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1993-09-11       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 9.  Under-reporting of adverse drug reactions : a systematic review.

Authors:  Lorna Hazell; Saad A W Shakir
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 5.228

  9 in total
  6 in total

1.  Prescribing safety: the case of inappropriate medicines.

Authors:  Rupert A Payne
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  The science of prescribing.

Authors:  Derek G Waller
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 4.335

3.  A Comparative Safety Analysis of Medicines Based on the UK Pharmacovigilance and General Practice Prescribing Data in England.

Authors:  Kinan Mokbel; Rob Daniels; Michael N Weedon; Leigh Jackson
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2022 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.155

4.  Impact of the black triangle label on prescribing of new drugs in the United Kingdom: lessons for the United States at a time of deregulation.

Authors:  Daniel B Horton; Tobias Gerhard; Amy Davidow; Brian L Strom
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2017-08-31       Impact factor: 2.890

5.  Are primary care factors associated with hospital episodes for adverse drug reactions? A national observational study.

Authors:  Ailsa J McKay; Roger B Newson; Michael Soljak; Elio Riboli; Josip Car; Azeem Majeed
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-12-29       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Contribution of industry funded post-marketing studies to drug safety: survey of notifications submitted to regulatory agencies.

Authors:  Angela Spelsberg; Christof Prugger; Peter Doshi; Kerstin Ostrowski; Thomas Witte; Dieter Hüsgen; Ulrich Keil
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2017-02-07
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.