Search

Objectives: The aim was to explore how the time to the first fall and 6-month fall incidence relates to rapidly and easily collected data in persons with acute stroke. Methods: Out of consecutively admitted patients with stroke at three stroke units, 284 with at least one follow-up were included in this prospective cohort study. During 6 months following discharge, participants reported falls using a diary and monthly phone calls. Data about participants’ characteristics, functions, and activities were collected during hospital stay and analyzed in relation to time to first fall by Cox regression and fall incidence by negative binomial regression. Results: Use of ⩾9 medications, paresis in arms, paresis in legs (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale), impaired protective reactions in sitting (Postural Reactions Test), and limitations in self-care (Barthel Index) were decisive risk factors for time to first fall. Limitations in mobility (Step Test, 30-s Chair Stand Test) were decisive risk factors for high fall incidence (p

Abstract Background PHARAO is a decision support system developed to evaluate the risk for a set of either common or serious side-effects resulting from a combination of pharmacodynamic effects from a patient’s medications. The objective of this study was to investigate the validity of the risk scores for the common side-effects generated by PHARAO in older patients. Methods Side-effects included were sedation, constipation, orthostatic symptoms, anticholinergic and serotonergic effects. The alerts generated by PHARAO were tested in 745 persons ≥65 years old. Dispensed prescriptions retrieved from the Swedish prescribed drug register were used to generate the pharmacological risk scores of patients’ medications. Symptoms possibly related to side-effects were extracted from medical records data. Results The PHARAO system generated 776 alerts, most often for the risk of anticholinergic symptoms. The total specificity estimates of the PHARAO system were 0.95, 0.89 and 0.78 for high, intermediate and low risk alerts, respectively. The corresponding sensitivity estimates were between 0.12 and 0.37. The negative predictive value was 0.90 and the positive predictive value ranged between 0.20–0.25. Conclusions The PHARAO system had a high specificity and negative predictive value to detect symptoms possibly associated with the of patients’ medications, while the sensitivity and positive predictive value were low. The PHARAO system has the potential to minimise the risk of over-alerts in combination with a drug-drug interaction alert system, but should be used in connection with a medical evaluation of the patient.

Elisabet Ekman1, Staffan Hägg2, Anders Sundström3, Viktoria Werkström11Regional Pharmacovigilance Unit, Clinical Pharmacology, Lund University Hospital, Lund, Sweden; 2Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden; 3Centre for Pharmacoepidemiology, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, SwedenAim: To describe spontaneously reported cases of erectile dysfunction (ED) in association with angiotensin II type I blockers (ARB) and other antihypertensive drugs.Subjects and methods: All spontaneously reported cases of ED submitted to the Swedish Medical Products Agency (MPA) between 1990 and 2006, where at least one antihypertensive drug was the suspected agent, were scrutinized. Patient demographics, drug treatment and adverse reactions were recorded. Using the Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network (BCPNN) method, the information component (IC) was calculated.Results: Among a total of 225 reports of ED, 59 involved antihypertensive drugs including ARB (9 cases) as suspected agents. A positive IC value was found indicating that ED was reported more often in association with antihypertensive drugs classes, except for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, compared with all other drugs in the database. Positive dechallenge was reported in 43 cases (72%).Discussion: All classes of major antihypertensive drugs including ARB were implicated as suspected agents in cases of ED. Few risk factors were identified. The relatively high reporting of ED in association with ARB is in contrast with previous studies, suggesting that ARB have neither a positive nor any effect on ED. This discrepancy suggests that further studies are warrnted on this potential adverse reaction to ARB.Keywords: adverse drug reaction, spontaneous reporting, antihypertensive drugs, angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers, erectile dysfunction

Anna K Jönsson1, Erzsebet Horváth-Puhó2, Staffan Hägg3, Lars Pedersen4, Henrik Toft Sørensen41Nordic School of Public Health, Gothenburg, Sweden; 2Centre for Registry Research, Aarhus C, Denmark; 3Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden; 4Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus C, DenmarkAbstract: During the last decade, the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been reported in users of antipsychotic drugs. However, the reports have been inconclusive. This study aimed to determine the relative risk of VTE in antipsychotic drug users. Using data from medical databases in North Jutland and Aarhus Counties, Denmark, and the Danish Civil Registration System, we identified 5,999 cases with a first-time diagnosis of VTE and, based on risk set sampling, 59,990 sex- and age-matched population controls during 1997–2005. Users of antipsychotic drugs were identified from population-based prescription databases and categorized based on filled prescriptions prior to admission date for VTE or index date for controls as current (at least one prescription within 90 days), recent (at least one prescription within 91–180 days), former (at least one prescription within 181–365 days) or nonusers (no recorded prescription within 365 days). Compared with nonusers, current users of any antipsychotic drugs had an increased risk of VTE (adjusted relative risk [ARR]: 1.99, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.69–2.34). Former users of any antipsychotic drugs had a nonsignificant elevated risk of VTE compared with nonusers (ARR: 1.54, 95% CI: 0.99–2.40, p-value: 0.056). In conclusion, users of antipsychotic drugs have an increased risk of VTE, compared with nonusers, which might be due to the treatment itself, to lifestyle factors, to the underlying disease, or to residual confounding. Keywords: antipsychotic agents, venous thromboembolism, adverse effects, case-control study

Although a majority of patients with hypertension require a multidrug therapy, this is rarely considered when measuring adherence from refill data. Moreover, investigating the association between refill non-adherence to antihypertensive therapy (AHT) and elevated blood pressure (BP) has been advocated.Identify factors associated with non-adherence to AHT, considering the multidrug therapy, and investigate the association between non-adherence to AHT and elevated BP.A retrospective cohort study including patients with hypertension, identified from a random sample of 5025 Swedish adults. Two measures of adherence were estimated by the proportion of days covered method (PDC≥80%): (1) Adherence to any antihypertensive medication and, (2) adherence to the full AHT regimen. Multiple logistic regressions were performed to investigate the association between sociodemographic factors (age, sex, education, income), clinical factors (user profile, number of antihypertensive medications, healthcare use, cardiovascular comorbidities) and non-adherence. Moreover, the association between non-adherence (long-term and a month prior to BP measurement) and elevated BP was investigated.Non-adherence to any antihypertensive medication was higher among persons < 65 years (Odds Ratio, OR 2.75 [95% CI, 1.18-6.43]) and with the lowest income (OR 2.05 [95% CI, 1.01-4.16]). Non-adherence to the full AHT regimen was higher among new users (OR 2.04 [95% CI, 1.32-3.15]), persons using specialized healthcare (OR 1.63, [95% CI, 1.14-2.32]), and having multiple antihypertensive medications (OR 1.85 [95% CI, 1.25-2.75] and OR 5.22 [95% CI, 3.48-7.83], for 2 and ≥3 antihypertensive medications, respectively). Non-adherence to any antihypertensive medication a month prior to healthcare visit was associated with elevated BP.Sociodemographic factors were associated with non-adherence to any antihypertensive medication while clinical factors with non-adherence to the full AHT regimen. These differing findings support considering the use of multiple antihypertensive medications when measuring refill adherence. Monitoring patients' refill adherence prior to healthcare visit may facilitate interpreting elevated BP.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to estimate the direct costs caused by ADEs, including costs for dispensed drugs, primary care, other outpatient care, and inpatient care, and to relate the direct costs caused by ADEs to the societal COI (direct and indirect costs), for patients with ADEs and for the entire study population. METHODS: We conducted a population-based observational retrospective cohort study of ADEs identified from medical records. From a random sample of 5025 adults in a Swedish county council, 4970 were included in the analyses. During a three-month study period in 2008, direct and indirect costs were estimated from resource use identified in the medical records and from register data on costs for resource use. RESULTS: Among 596 patients with ADEs, the average direct costs per patient caused by ADEs were USD 444.9 [95% CI: 264.4 to 625.3], corresponding to USD 21 million per 100 000 adult inhabitants per year. Inpatient care accounted for 53.9% of all direct costs caused by ADEs. For patients with ADEs, the average societal cost of illness was USD 6235.0 [5442.8 to 7027.2], of which direct costs were USD 2830.1 [2260.7 to 3399.4] (45%), and indirect costs USD 3404.9 [2899.3 to 3910.4] (55%). The societal cost of illness was higher for patients with ADEs compared to other patients. ADEs caused 9.5% of all direct healthcare costs in the study population. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare costs for patients with ADEs are substantial across different settings; in primary care, other outpatient care and inpatient care. Hence the economic impact of ADEs will be underestimated in studies focusing on inpatient ADEs alone. Moreover, the high proportion of indirect costs in the societal COI for patients with ADEs suggests that the observed costs caused by ADEs would be even higher if including indirect costs. Additional studies are needed to identify interventions to prevent and manage ADEs.

Within pharmacovigilance, knowledge of time-to-onset (time from start of drug administration to onset of reaction) is important in causality assessment of drugs and suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and may indicate pharmacological mechanisms involved. It has been suggested that time-to-onset from individual case reports can be used for detection of safety signals. However, some ADRs only occur during treatment, while those that do occur later are less likely to be reported. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of treatment duration on the reported time-to-onset. Case reports from the WHO Global ICSR database, VigiBase, up until February 5(th) 2010 were the basis of this study. To examine the effect of duration of treatment on reported time-to-onset, angioedema and hepatitis were selected to represent short and long latency ADRs, respectively. The reported time-to-onset for each of these ADRs was contrasted for a set of drugs expected to be used short- or long-term, respectively. The study included 2,980 unique reports for angioedema and 1,159 for hepatitis. Median reported time-to-onset for angioedema in short-term treatments ranged 0-1 days (median 0.5), for angioedema in long-term treatments 0-26 days (median 8), for hepatitis in short-term treatments 4-12 days (median 7.5) and for hepatitis in long term treatments 19-73 days (median 28). Short-term treatments presented significantly shorter reported time-to-onset than long-term treatments. Of note is that reported time-to-onset for angioedema for long-term treatments (median value of medians being 8 days) was very similar to that of hepatitis for short-term treatments (median value of medians equal 7.5 days). The expected duration of treatment needs to be considered in the interpretation of reported time-to-onset and should be accounted for in signal detection method development and case evaluation.

PURPOSE: Adverse drug events (ADEs) are common and often preventable among inpatients, but self-reported ADEs have not been investigated in a representative sample of the general public. The objectives of this study were to estimate the 1-month prevalence of self-reported ADEs among the adult general public, and the perceived preventability of 2 ADE categories: adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and sub-therapeutic effects (STEs). METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, a postal survey was sent in October 2010 to a random sample of 13 931 Swedish residents aged ≥ 18 years. Self-reported ADEs experienced during the past month included ADRs, STEs, drug dependence, drug intoxications and morbidity due to drug-related untreated indication. ADEs could be associated with prescription, non-prescription or herbal drugs. The respondents estimated whether ADRs and STEs could have been prevented. ADE prevalences in age groups (18-44, 45-64, or ≥65 years) were compared. RESULTS: Of 7099 respondents (response rate 51.0%), ADEs were reported by 19.4% (95% confidence interval, 18.5-20.3%), and the prevalence did not differ by age group (p>0.05). The prevalences of self-reported ADRs, STEs, and morbidities due to drug-related untreated indications were 7.8% (7.2-8.4%), 7.6% (7.0-8.2%) and 8.1% (7.5-8.7%), respectively. The prevalence of self-reported drug dependence was 2.2% (1.9-2.6%), and drug intoxications 0.2% (0.1-0.3%). The respondents considered 19.2% (14.8-23.6%) of ADRs and STEs preventable. Although reported drugs varied between ADE categories, most ADEs were attributable to commonly dispensed drugs. Drugs reported for all and preventable events were similar. CONCLUSIONS: One-fifth of the adult general public across age groups reported ADEs during the past month, indicating a need for prevention strategies beyond hospitalised patients. For this, the underlying causes of ADEs should increasingly be investigated. The high burden of ADEs and preventable ADEs from widely used drugs across care settings supports redesigning a safer healthcare system to adequately tackle the problem.

BACKGROUND: Numerous observational studies suggest that preventable adverse drug reactions are a significant burden in healthcare, but no meta-analysis using a standardised definition for adverse drug reactions exists. The aim of the study was to estimate the percentage of patients with preventable adverse drug reactions and the preventability of adverse drug reactions in adult outpatients and inpatients. METHODS: Studies were identified through searching Cochrane, CINAHL, EMBASE, IPA, Medline, PsycINFO and Web of Science in September 2010, and by hand searching the reference lists of identified papers. Original peer-reviewed research articles in English that defined adverse drug reactions according to WHO's or similar definition and assessed preventability were included. Disease or treatment specific studies were excluded. Meta-analysis on the percentage of patients with preventable adverse drug reactions and the preventability of adverse drug reactions was conducted. RESULTS: Data were analysed from 16 original studies on outpatients with 48797 emergency visits or hospital admissions and from 8 studies involving 24128 inpatients. No studies in primary care were identified. Among adult outpatients, 2.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.2-3.2%) had preventable adverse drug reactions and 52% (95% CI: 42-62%) of adverse drug reactions were preventable. Among inpatients, 1.6% (95% CI: 0.1-51%) had preventable adverse drug reactions and 45% (95% CI: 33-58%) of adverse drug reactions were preventable. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis corroborates that preventable adverse drug reactions are a significant burden to healthcare among adult outpatients. Among both outpatients and inpatients, approximately half of adverse drug reactions are preventable, demonstrating that further evidence on prevention strategies is required. The percentage of patients with preventable adverse drug reactions among inpatients and in primary care is largely unknown and should be investigated in future research.