Adverse drug reactions (ADR) are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, often identified only post-marketingly. Improvement in current ADR reporting, including utility of underused or innovative methods, is crucial to improve patient safety and public health. Hospital-based monitoring is one of the methods used to collect data about drug prescriptions and adverse events. The aims of this study were to identify the most frequent ADRs recognized by the attending physicians, study their nature, and to target these ADRs in order to take future preventive measures. A prospective study was conducted over a 7-month period in an internal medicine department using stimulated spontaneous reporting for identifying ADRs. Out of the 254 admissions, 32 ADRs in 37 patients (14.56%) were validated from the total of 36 suspected ADRs in 41 patients. Female predominance was noted over males in case of ADRs. Fifty percent of total ADRs occurred due to multiple drug therapy. Dermatological ADRs were found to be the most frequent (68.75%), followed by respiratory, central nervous system and gastrointestinal ADRs. The drugs most frequently involved were antibiotics, anti-tubercular agents, antigout agents, and NSAIDs. The most commonly reported reactions were itching and rashes. Out of the 32 reported ADRs, 50% of the reactions were probable, 46.87% of the reactions were possible and 3.12% of the reactions were definite. The severity assessment done by using the Hartwig and Seigel scale indicated that the majority of ADRs were ‘Mild’ followed by ‘Moderate’ and ‘Severe’ reactions, respectively. Out of all, 75% of ADRs were recovered. The most potent management of ADRs was found to be drug withdrawal. Our study indicated that hospital based monitoring was a good method to detect links between drug exposure and adverse drug reactions. Adequate training regarding pharmacology and optimization of drug therapy might be helpful to reduce ADR morbidity and mortality.

tion was built (Tableau 8) to visualize the information to be easily communicated to local authorities and clinicians. Results: A middle-sized Finnish municipality with 74 168 inhabitants (Joensuu) was chosen as a case-example. The estimated number of diabetic patients was 2267, out of which 1678 had T2D. Within three years among patients with T2D, the predicted number of CHD events would be 73 and 57 for HbA1c levels 6.5% and 8.0%, respectively, resulting total of 16 avoidable CHD events. ConClusions: By bringing the understanding of epidemiology and treatment effects to local level, there is a possibility to show the positive outcomes of good diabetes care in real practice. This information may be used to help budget holders in resource allocation and to motivate authorities, clinicians (and patients) to follow the diabetes treatments guidelines.