DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20174379

Analysis of the pattern of ADR’s reported to an ADR monitoring center in South India: a prospective study

Anant Khot, Thresiamma K. Thomas, Savithri P., Rajalakshmi A. N.

Abstract


Background: All medicines with an ability to produce a desired therapeutic effect will also have the potential to cause unwanted adverse effects. It has been established that ~ 2.9%-5.6% of all hospital admissions are caused by Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) & as many as 35% of the hospitalized patients experience an ADR during their hospital stay. An incidence of fatal ADRs is 0.23%-0.41%. In some countries, ADRs rank among the top 10 leading causes of mortality. In order to increase awareness, observe the pattern of ADRs and communicate scientific data to prevent ADRs, this study was undertaken.

Methods: It was a prospective observational study conducted at a tertiary hospital in Kochi. All the spontaneously reported ADRs were assessed and analyzed for type, severity and causality.

Results: A total of 120 ADRs were reported during the study period. Most of the ADRs were seen in females in the age group of 61-70 years. Skin and appendage disorders were the most common manifestation of different type of ADRs (49.2%). Antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents (30.8%), followed by anti-infectives for systemic use (29.2%) were mostly implicated in the causation of ADRs. Majority of the ADRs were of mild to moderate in severity (89.2%).

Conclusions: Although small, but significant number of patients had severe ADRs. Hence, we require a robust system for monitoring the medication use process. So that we can prevent and reduce the morbidity and mortality due to therapeutic agents.


Keywords


Adverse drug reaction, Antineoplastic agents, Morbidity, Hospitalization

Full Text:

PDF

References


Edwards IR, Aronson JK. Adverse drug reactions: definitions, diagnosis, and management. Lancet. 2000;356:1255-9.

Sriram S, Ghasemi A, Ramasamy R, Devi M, Balasubramanian R, Ravi TK, et al. Prevalence of adverse drug reactions at a private tertiary care hospital in south India. J Res Med Sci. 2011 Jan;16(1):16-25.

Ramesh M, Pandit J, Parthasarathi G. Adverse drug reactions in a south Indian hospital: their severity and cost involved. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2003 Dec;12(8):687-92.

Agarwal RAS. Chapter-01 Key Definitions in Pharmacovigilance. In: Gupta SK, editor. Textbook of Pharmacovigilance [Internet]. Jaypee Brothers Pvt Ltd; 2011. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp/books/11442_1

Organization WH. The use of the WHO-UMC system for standardized case causality assessment. Uppsala Uppsala Monit Cent [Internet]. 2005;(3):2-7. Available at: http://whoumc.org/Graphics/24734.pdf

Hartwig SC, Siegel J, Schneider PJ. Preventability and severity assessment in reporting adverse drug reactions. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1992;49:2229‑32.

ATC/ DDD Index Available at: http://www.whocc.no/atc_ddd_index/

Mozzicato P. MedDRA: An overview of the medical dictionary for regulatory activities. Pharmaceut Med [Internet]. 2009;23(2):65-75. Available at: http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-70349086122&partnerID=40&md5=37cb675776f86e15cb59411b9bf2278b

Halkai K, Deshmukh S, Rao YV. An evaluation of adverse drug reactions at ADR monitoring center in tertiary care hospital. International Journal of Therapeutic Applications. 2016; 32:86-9.

Sutradhar SD, Ray D. A cross-sectional study of patterns of adverse drug reactions reported in the department of pharmacology of a tertiary care teaching hospital in North East India. International Journal of Comprehensive and Advanced Pharmacology. 2017;2(1):33-5.

Yadav D, Acharya RP. Incidence and severity associated with adverse drug reactions in surgery inpatients. J Pharm Sci Res. 2015;7(9):671-5.