Reporting of adverse drug reactions by nurses

Morrison–Griffiths, Sally; Walley, Thomas; Park, B Kevin; Breckenridge, Alasdair; Pirmohamed, Munir

doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(03)13043-7

Cited by 86 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…35 Estes profissionais são responsáveis pela administração e monitorização da terapêutica, particularmente nos idosos, estando numa posição privilegiada para identificar iatrogenia medicamentosa. [35][36][37][38][39] Apesar da nova legislação de Farmacovigilância permitir que tanto os profissionais de saúde como os utentes possam notificar suspeitas de reações adversas, a contribuição destes últimos tem sido residual. 40 Os utentes já estavam autorizados a notificar suspeitas de reações adversas há alguns anos noutros países, por exemplo na Dinamarca, na Holanda ou no Reino Unido.…”

unclassified

Farmacovigilância em Portugal: Atividade da Unidade Regional do Centro

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:The aim of this study was to characterize the spontaneous reports of adverse events that were received by the Central Portugal Regional Pharmacovigilance Unit. Material and Methods: Spontaneous reports received between 01/2001 and 12/2013 were considered. The annual reporting ratios were estimated. The cases were characterized according to their seriousness, previous description, causality assessment, origin and professional group of the reporter, type of adverse event and pharmacotherapeutic groups of the suspected drugs most frequently reported. Results:The Pharmacovigilance Unit received 2408 reports that contained 5749 adverse events. In 2013, the reporting rate was estimated at 171 reports per million inhabitants. Fifty-five percent of the reports were assessed as serious. Ninety percent of the cases were assessed as being at least possibly related with the suspected drug. The suspected drugs most frequently reported were antiinfectives for systemic use (n = 809, 33%). The most frequently reported adverse events were "Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders" (n = 1139, 20%). There were 154 (6.4%) reports resulting in life-threatening situations and/or death, and 88 (3.6%) containing at least one adverse event assessed as serious, unknown and certain or probable. Discussion: The present results are in line with those found in other studies, namely the seriousness and type of the adverse events and the pharmacotherapeutic groups of the most frequently reported suspected drugs. Conclusion:In the last years, the Central Portugal Regional Pharmacovigilance Unit has registered a growth in the reporting rate in general, as well as an increase in the reporting of unknown and serious adverse drug reactions.

show abstract

unclassified

Farmacovigilância em Portugal: Atividade da Unidade Regional do Centro

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nurses could be a useful resource for improving the reporting rate of ADRs .This finding was supported by other studies also. [22] The paramedical staff could play an important role in ADRs reporting, because they are close to the patient and are responsible for drug administration and recording side effects. They can alert the responsible physician about possible ADRs without time gap.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Knowledge, Attitude and Practices of Resident Doctors, Interns and Nurses on Adverse Drug Reaction Monitoring and Reporting In a Tertiary Care Hospital

Jagtap¹

2017

jmscr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…24 If this opportunity is missed, then detecting and quantifying safety signals relies on spontaneous reporting, where data from the evolved product are potentially subject to a "double dilution" effect. 25 Firstly, only a small fraction of the true number of cases are reported because adverse event data are no longer actively collected. 25 Then the safety data from the evolved product may be further diluted by being pooled with extensive datasets from the original formulation.…”

Section: A Natural Experiments Of Regulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…25 Firstly, only a small fraction of the true number of cases are reported because adverse event data are no longer actively collected. 25 Then the safety data from the evolved product may be further diluted by being pooled with extensive datasets from the original formulation. This is particularly concerning because adverse events associated with evolved biologicals may emerge at a time when safety data from the evolved product are dwarfed by that of the original (fig 3⇓).…”

Section: A Natural Experiments Of Regulationmentioning

confidence: 99%