Literature DB >> 2368724

Use of standardized screening procedures to identify adverse drug reactions.

K E Koch1.   

Abstract

The development of an adverse drug reaction (ADR)-monitoring program using standardized screening procedures in a 650-bed hospital is described. A concurrent ADR-reporting system that relied on health-care professionals to report observed ADRs to the pharmacy had generated just two ADR reports during the previous year. The pharmacy developed a program that used standardized procedures to screen for ADRs. The Technicon computer was programmed to screen the previous day's orders for antidotes or "tracer" drugs. In addition, pharmacists screened all laboratory reports of serum drug concentration determinations and positive tests for Clostridium difficile toxin. Spontaneous reporting of ADRs by nurses and physicians was strengthened by use of a revised notification form, newsletters, and inservice-education programs. During the first seven months of the program, 298 ADRs were identified, 15 of which were submitted to FDA. The standardized screening procedures accounted for 149 reports. Pharmacists reviewed an average of 21 reports of high serum drug concentrations each month; on average, 11 of these reports involved ADRs. Screening of microbiology laboratory reports identified 29 ADRs. Physicians reported ADRs infrequently and were likely to report only serious or unexpected reactions. Nurses and pharmacists identified reactions sporadically. Quality assurance auditors were consistent in screening ADRs, but not all reported reactions proved to be ADRs. The use of standardized screening procedures was effective in this pharmacy-based ADR-monitoring program.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2368724

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Hosp Pharm        ISSN: 0002-9289


  6 in total

1.  Academic detailing improves identification and reporting of adverse drug events.

Authors:  R G Schlienger; T F Lüscher; R A Schoenenberger; W E Haefeli
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  1999-06

Review 2.  Detecting adverse events using information technology.

Authors:  David W Bates; R Scott Evans; Harvey Murff; Peter D Stetson; Lisa Pizziferri; George Hripcsak
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2003 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Development of a computerized adverse drug event monitor.

Authors:  R S Evans; S L Pestotnik; D C Classen; S B Bass; R L Menlove; R M Gardner; J P Burke
Journal:  Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care       Date:  1991

Review 4.  A systematic review to evaluate the accuracy of electronic adverse drug event detection.

Authors:  Alan J Forster; Alison Jennings; Claire Chow; Ciera Leeder; Carl van Walraven
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2012 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.497

5.  Desire for information about drugs: relationships with patients' characteristics and adverse effects.

Authors:  R Laaksonen; C Duggan; I Bates
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  2002-10

6.  Strategies for detecting adverse drug events among older persons in the ambulatory setting.

Authors:  Terry S Field; Jerry H Gurwitz; Leslie R Harrold; Jeffrey M Rothschild; Kristin Debellis; Andrew C Seger; Leslie S Fish; Lawrence Garber; Michael Kelleher; David W Bates
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2004-08-06       Impact factor: 4.497

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.