IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/drugsa/v40y2017i7d10.1007_s40264-017-0530-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Quality of Clinical Information in Adverse Drug Reaction Reports by Patients and Healthcare Professionals: A Retrospective Comparative Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Leàn Rolfes

    (Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb
    University of Groningen)

  • Florence Hunsel

    (Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb
    University of Groningen)

  • Laura Linden

    (Utrecht University)

  • Katja Taxis

    (University of Groningen)

  • Eugène Puijenbroek

    (Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb
    University of Groningen)

Abstract

Introduction Clinical information is needed to assess the causal relationship between a drug and an adverse drug reaction (ADR) in a reliable way. Little is known about the level of relevant clinical information about the ADRs reported by patients. Objective The aim was to determine to what extent patients report relevant clinical information about an ADR compared with their healthcare professional. Methods A retrospective analysis of all ADR reports on the same case, i.e., cases with a report from both the patient and the patient’s healthcare professional, selected from the database of the Dutch Pharmacovigilance Center Lareb, was conducted. The extent to which relevant clinical information was reported was assessed by trained pharmacovigilance assessors, using a structured tool. The following four domains were assessed: ADR, chronology, suspected drug, and patient characteristics. For each domain, the proportion of reported information in relation to information deemed relevant was calculated. An average score of all relevant domains was determined and categorized as poorly (≤45%), moderately (from 46 to 74%) or well (≥75%) reported. Data were analyzed using a paired sample t test and Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results A total of 197 cases were included. In 107 cases (54.3%), patients and healthcare professionals reported a similar level of clinical information. Statistical analysis demonstrated no overall differences between the groups (p = 0.126). Conclusions In a unique study of cases of ADRs reported by patients and healthcare professionals, we found that patients report clinical information at a similar level as their healthcare professional. For an optimal pharmacovigilance, both healthcare professionals and patient should be encouraged to report.

Suggested Citation

  • Leàn Rolfes & Florence Hunsel & Laura Linden & Katja Taxis & Eugène Puijenbroek, 2017. "The Quality of Clinical Information in Adverse Drug Reaction Reports by Patients and Healthcare Professionals: A Retrospective Comparative Analysis," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 40(7), pages 607-614, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:40:y:2017:i:7:d:10.1007_s40264-017-0530-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s40264-017-0530-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40264-017-0530-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40264-017-0530-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leàn Rolfes & Florence Hunsel & Katja Taxis & Eugène Puijenbroek, 2016. "The Impact of Experiencing Adverse Drug Reactions on the Patient’s Quality of Life: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study in the Netherlands," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 39(8), pages 769-776, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cristiano Matos & Gerda Weits & Florence Hunsel, 2019. "The Role of European Patient Organizations in Pharmacovigilance," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 547-557, April.
    2. Gilles Defer & Sophie Fedrizzi & Damien Chevanne & François Montastruc & Anais R. Briant & Jean-Jacques Parienti & Laure Peyro-Saint-Paul, 2021. "Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Using a Mobile Device Application by Persons with Multiple Sclerosis: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 223-233, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sarah Watson & Rebecca E. Chandler & Henric Taavola & Linda Härmark & Birgitta Grundmark & Alem Zekarias & Kristina Star & Florence Hunsel, 2018. "Safety Concerns Reported by Patients Identified in a Collaborative Signal Detection Workshop using VigiBase: Results and Reflections from Lareb and Uppsala Monitoring Centre," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 203-212, February.
    2. Rike van Eekeren & Leàn Rolfes & Andries S. Koster & Lara Magro & Gurumurthy Parthasarathi & Hussain Al Ramimmy & Tim Schutte & Daisuke Tanaka & Eugène van Puijenbroek & Linda Härmark, 2018. "What Future Healthcare Professionals Need to Know About Pharmacovigilance: Introduction of the WHO PV Core Curriculum for University Teaching with Focus on Clinical Aspects," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 41(11), pages 1003-1011, November.
    3. Solomon Shiferaw Nadew & Kidanemariam G/Michael Beyene & Solomon Worku Beza, 2020. "Adverse drug reaction reporting practice and associated factors among medical doctors in government hospitals in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-19, January.
    4. Leàn Rolfes & Michelle Haaksman & Florence van Hunsel & Eugène van Puijenbroek, 2020. "Insight into the Severity of Adverse Drug Reactions as Experienced by Patients," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 291-293, March.
    5. Cristiano Matos & Gerda Weits & Florence Hunsel, 2019. "The Role of European Patient Organizations in Pharmacovigilance," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 547-557, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:40:y:2017:i:7:d:10.1007_s40264-017-0530-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40264 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.