Literature DB >> 20701410

Adverse drug reaction reporting in the UK: a retrospective observational comparison of yellow card reports submitted by patients and healthcare professionals.

David J McLernon1, Christine M Bond, Philip C Hannaford, Margaret C Watson, Amanda J Lee, Lorna Hazell, Anthony Avery.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the UK, spontaneous reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) by healthcare professionals has been in operation since 1964 through the Yellow Card Scheme (YCS). From 2005, patients themselves have been able to submit Yellow Card reports.
OBJECTIVE: To compare patient characteristics, suspected drugs and suspected ADRs reported by patients with those reported by healthcare professionals using the YCS. DESIGN AND
SETTING: Retrospective observational study in the UK.
METHODS: Participants were patients reported to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), either by themselves, a representative or a healthcare professional, as having one or more suspected ADRs between October 2005 and September 2007. The main outcome measures were ADRs and time taken to report.
RESULTS: In total, 26 129 Yellow Card reports from patients and healthcare professionals were received from the MHRA for the 2-year study period (19.8% patient and 80.2% healthcare professional). More Yellow Card reports were made for female than male patients (p < 0.001). Patients reported a significantly higher number of suspected ADRs per report than healthcare professionals (median [interquartile range {IQR}] of 3 [2-5] vs 2 [1-3], respectively; p < 0.001). A higher proportion of patient reports (16.1%) contained more than one suspect drug than healthcare professional reports (9%; p < 0.001). Healthcare professional reports had a higher proportion of ADRs that caused hospitalization (18.8% vs 12.9%), were life threatening (11.1% vs 6.2%) or caused death (2.6% vs 0.7%) than patient reports (all p < 0.001). Patient reporters took a significantly longer time to report their reaction than healthcare professionals (median [IQR] of 104 [27-463] vs 28 [13-75] days respectively; p < 0.001). Direct comparisons of the seriousness of the ADRs were not possible because of important differences between patient and healthcare professional versions of the Yellow Cards.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first substantial, published study in the UK to compare Yellow Card reports from patients and healthcare professionals. Whilst patients report more suspected ADRs to more suspect drugs than healthcare professionals, healthcare professionals tend to report more serious reactions that result in hospitalization, are life threatening or cause death. Further research is required to investigate the extent to which the extra information from patient reporters contributes to signal identification when assessing drug safety.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20701410     DOI: 10.2165/11536510-000000000-00000

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


  15 in total

Review 1.  Making the most of spontaneous adverse drug reaction reporting.

Authors:  Patrick C Waller
Journal:  Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 4.080

Review 2.  Patient reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions: a review of published literature and international experience.

Authors:  A Blenkinsopp; P Wilkie; M Wang; P A Routledge
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.335

3.  Reporting of adverse drug reactions by hospital doctors and the response to intervention.

Authors:  P McGettigan; J Golden; R M Conroy; N Arthur; J Feely
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 4.335

4.  The missing voice of patients in drug-safety reporting.

Authors:  Ethan Basch
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2010-03-11       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  A prediction model for polypharmacy: are older, educated women more susceptible to an adverse drug event?

Authors:  B A Perry; L W Turner
Journal:  J Women Aging       Date:  2001

Review 6.  Consumer adverse drug reaction reporting: a new step in pharmacovigilance?

Authors:  Kees van Grootheest; Linda de Graaf; Lolkje T W de Jong-van den Berg
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 5.606

7.  Adverse drug reaction reporting by patients in the Netherlands: three years of experience.

Authors:  Joyce de Langen; Florence van Hunsel; Anneke Passier; Lolkje de Jong-van den Berg; Kees van Grootheest
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 5.606

8.  Women encounter ADRs more often than do men.

Authors:  Y Zopf; C Rabe; A Neubert; K G Gassmann; W Rascher; E G Hahn; K Brune; H Dormann
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2008-07-05       Impact factor: 2.953

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

10.  Adverse drug reactions in hospital in-patients: a prospective analysis of 3695 patient-episodes.

Authors:  Emma C Davies; Christopher F Green; Stephen Taylor; Paula R Williamson; David R Mottram; Munir Pirmohamed
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-02-11       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  35 in total

Review 1.  Experiences with adverse drug reaction reporting by patients: an 11-country survey.

Authors:  Florence van Hunsel; Linda Härmark; Shanthi Pal; Sten Olsson; Kees van Grootheest
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2012-01-01       Impact factor: 5.606

2.  How patient reporters identify adverse drug reactions: a qualitative study of reporting via the UK Yellow Card Scheme.

Authors:  Janet Krska; Claire Anderson; Elizabeth Murphy; Anthony J Avery
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2011-05-01       Impact factor: 5.606

3.  Adverse drug reactions: analysis of spontaneous reporting system in Europe in 2007-2009.

Authors:  Jindrich Srba; Veronika Descikova; Jiri Vlcek
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 2.953

4.  Neuropsychiatric events with varenicline: a modified prescription-event monitoring study in general practice in England.

Authors:  Yvonne Buggy; Victoria Cornelius; Carole Fogg; Rachna Kasliwal; Deborah Layton; Saad A W Shakir
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 5.606

Review 5.  ADR Reporting by the General Public: Lessons Learnt from the Dutch and Swedish Systems.

Authors:  Linda Härmark; Florence van Hunsel; Birgitta Grundmark
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 5.606

Review 6.  Design and conduct of early phase drug studies in children: challenges and opportunities.

Authors:  Michael Rieder; Daniel Hawcutt
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2016-08-08       Impact factor: 4.335

7.  How do patients contribute to signal detection? : A retrospective analysis of spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions in the UK's Yellow Card Scheme.

Authors:  Lorna Hazell; Victoria Cornelius; Philip Hannaford; Saad Shakir; Anthony J Avery
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 5.606

8.  The Unintended Consequences of Adverse Event Information on Medicines' Risks and Label Content.

Authors:  Giovanni Furlan; David Power
Journal:  Pharmaceut Med       Date:  2020-11-16

9.  Effect of pharmacist involvement on patient reporting of adverse drug reactions: first Italian study.

Authors:  Roberto Leone; Ugo Moretti; Paola D'Incau; Anita Conforti; Lara Magro; Riccardo Lora; Giampaolo Velo
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 5.606

10.  First French experience of ADR reporting by patients after a mass immunization campaign with Influenza A (H1N1) pandemic vaccines: a comparison of reports submitted by patients and healthcare professionals.

Authors:  Geneviève Durrieu; Aurore Palmaro; Laure Pourcel; Céline Caillet; Angeline Faucher; Alexis Jacquet; Shéhérazade Ouaret; Marie Christine Perault-Pochat; Carmen Kreft-Jais; Anne Castot; Maryse Lapeyre-Mestre; Jean-Louis Montastruc
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 5.606

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.