Development, implementation, and analysis of adverse drug reaction monitoring system in a rural tertiary care teaching hospital in Narketpally, Telangana

S. M. Shareef; C. D. M. Naidu; Shrinivas R. Raikar; Y. Venkata Rao; U. Devika

doi:10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20150386

Authors

S. M. Shareef Department of Pharmacology, Kamineni Institute of Medical Sciences, Nalgonda, Telangana, India
C. D. M. Naidu Department of Pharmacology, Kamineni Institute of Medical Sciences, Nalgonda, Telangana, India
Shrinivas R. Raikar Department of Pharmacology, Kamineni Institute of Medical Sciences, Nalgonda, Telangana, India
Y. Venkata Rao Department of Pharmacology, Kamineni Institute of Medical Sciences, Nalgonda, Telangana, India
U. Devika Department of Pharmacology, Kamineni Institute of Medical Sciences, Nalgonda, Telangana, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20150386

Keywords:

Pharmacovigilance, Adverse drug reactions, Tertiary care hospital

Abstract

Background: Adverse drug reactions (ADR) are the fourth leading cause of mortality and a great concern in therapeutics. Pharmacovigilance is more important in India as the health care system is inadequate with poor doctor-patient ratio, high incidence of self-medication, and presence of counterfeit drugs. The present study was conducted with the aim of analyzing the pattern of ADR occurring in a rural tertiary care hospital with a newly established pharmacovigilance center and to identify the most frequent ADRs, common drugs implicated and severity of reactions.

Methods: A non-interventional observational prospective study was conducted over a year. The red boxes for dropping the filled yellow ADR forms were installed in all the wards and outpatient departments. Additional information and missing data were obtained personally by either consulting the physician or through case sheets.

Results: The most common class of drugs implicated in the causation of ADRs was antimicrobials (52%), followed by drugs acting on the central nervous system. The most commonly observed ADRs were dermatological Type B reactions. The majority of the reactions belonged to possible or probable category, but no reaction was categorized as definite.

Conclusion: Dermatological reactions are the most common ADR occurring in our hospital and antimicrobials are the most common causative drugs. The reporting rate was adequate, and there is still a need for increasing the awareness and knowledge about ADR reporting system and pharmacovigilance for promoting the safe use of drugs.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

World Health Organization. International drug monitoring: the role of the hospital. In Technical report series no. 425. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1969: 1-24. Available at: http://www.whqlibdoc.who.int/trs/WHO_TRS_425.pdf. Accessed 22 March 2015

Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. JAMA. 1998;279(15):1200-5.

Meyboom RH, Lindquist M, Egberts AC, Edwards IR. Signal selection and follow-up in pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf. 2002;25(6):459-65.

Pirmohamed M, Breckenridge AM, Kitteringham NR, Park BK. Adverse drug reactions. BMJ. 1998;316:1295-8.

Swamy S, Bhanuprakash, Nadig P, Muralimohan, Shetty M. Profile of suspect adverse drug reactions in a teaching tertiary care hospital. J Pharmacol Clin Toxicol. 2013;1(1):1005.

Arulmani R, Rajendran SD, Suresh B. Adverse drug reaction monitoring in a secondary care hospital in South India. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2008;65(2):210-6.

Vijayakumar TM, Dhanaraju MD. Description of adverse drug reactions in a multi-speciality teaching hospital. Int J Integr Med. 2013;1(26):1-6.

Pharmacovigilance Programme of India. CDSCO, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. Ghaziabad: Pharmacovigilance Programme of India; 2010

The use of the WHO-UMC system for standardised case causality assessment. Available at: http://www.who-umc.org/Graphics/24734.pdf. Accessed 02 October 2013.

Rawlins MD, Thomson JW. Mechanisms of adverse drug reactions. In Davies DM, editor. Textbook of Adverse Reactions. New York: Oxford University Press; 1991: 18-45.

Hartwig SC, Siegel J, Schneider PJ. Preventability and severity assessment in reporting adverse drug reactions. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1992;49(9):2229-32.

Patidar D, Rajput MS, Nirmal NP, Savitri W. Implementation and evaluation of adverse drug reaction monitoring system in a tertiary care teaching hospital in Mumbai, India. Interdiscip Toxicol. 2013;6(1):41-6.

Pharmacovigilance programme of India (PvPI). Newsletter. 2014;4(10):1-16.

Murphy BM, Frigo LC. Development, implementation, and results of a successful multidisciplinary adverse drug reaction reporting program in a university teaching hospital. Hosp Pharm. 1993;28(12):1199-204, 1240.

Lobo MG, Pinheiro SM, Castro JG, Momenté VG, Pranchevicius MC. Adverse drug reaction monitoring: support for pharmacovigilance at a tertiary care hospital in Northern Brazil. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. 2013;14:5.

Lin SH, Lin MS. A survey on drug-related hospitalization in a community teaching hospital. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol. 1993;31(2):66-9.

Dutta SB, Beg MA, Bawa S, Anjoom M, Varma A, Singh NK, et al. A retrospective analysis of adverse drug reactions in a tertiary care teaching hospital at Dehradun, Uttarakhand. Int J Basic Clin Pharmacol. 2015;4(1):121-4.

Caranasos GJ, Stewart RB, Cluff LE. Drug-induced illness leading to hospitalization. JAMA. 1974;228(6):713-7.