Pharmacovigilance: A Worldwide Master Key for Drug Safety Monitoring

Pharmacovigilance is like a sunshade to describe the processes for monitoring and evaluating ADRs and it is a key component of effective drug regulation systems, clinical practice and public health programmes. The number of Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) reported resulted in an increase in the volume of data handled, and to understand the pharmacovigilance, a high level of expertise is required to rapidly detect drug risks as well as to defend the product against an inappropriate removal. The current global network of pharmacovigilance centers, coordinated by the Uppsala Monitoring Centre, would be strengthened by an independent system of review. This would consider litigious and important drug safety issues that have the potential to affect public health adversely beyond national boundaries. Recently, pharmacovigilance has been confined, mainly to detect adverse drug events that were previously either unknown or poorly understood. Pharmacovigilance is an important and integral part of clinical research and these days it is growing in many countries. Today many pharmacovigilance centers are working for drug safety monitoring in this global pitch, however, at the turn of the millennium pharmacovigilance faces major challenges in aspect of better safety and monitoring of drugs. In this review we will discuss about drug safety, worldwide pharmacovigilance centers and their role, benefits and challenges of pharmacovigilance and its future consideration in healthcare sectors

A role for pharmacists in community-based post-discharge warfarin management: protocol for the 'the role of community pharmacy in post hospital management of patients initiated on warfarin' study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Shorter periods of hospitalisation and increasing warfarin use have placed stress on community-based healthcare services to care for patients taking warfarin after hospital discharge, a high-risk period for these patients. A previous randomised controlled trial demonstrated that a post-discharge service of 4 home visits and point-of-care (POC) International Normalised Ratio (INR) testing by a trained pharmacist improved patients' outcomes. The current study aims to modify this previously trialled service model to implement and then evaluate a sustainable program to enable the smooth transition of patients taking warfarin from the hospital to community setting.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The service will be trialled in 8 sites across 3 Australian states using a prospective, controlled cohort study design. Patients discharged from hospital taking warfarin will receive 2 or 3 home visits by a trained 'home medicines review (HMR)-accredited' pharmacist in their 8 to 10 days after hospital discharge. Visits will involve a HMR, comprehensive warfarin education, and POC INR monitoring in collaboration with patients' general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists. Patient outcomes will be compared to those in a control, or 'usual care', group. The primary outcome measure will be the proportion of patients experiencing a major bleeding event in the 90 days after discharge. Secondary outcome measures will include combined major bleeding and thromboembolic events, death, cessation of warfarin therapy, INR control at 8 days post-discharge and unplanned hospital readmissions from any cause. Stakeholder satisfaction will be assessed using structured postal questionnaire mailed to patients, GPs, community pharmacists and accredited pharmacists at the completion of their study involvement.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study design incorporates several aspects of prior interventions that have been demonstrated to improve warfarin management, including POC INR testing, warfarin education and home visits by trained pharmacists. It faces several potential challenges, including the tight timeframe for patient follow-up in the post-discharge period. Its strengths lie in a strong multidisciplinary team and the utilisation of existing healthcare frameworks. It is hoped that this study will provide the evidence to support the national roll-out of the program as a new Australian professional community pharmacy service.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Number <a href="http://www.anzctr.org.au/trial_view.aspx?ID=82959">12608000334303</a>.</p

Systematic review of methods used in meta-analyses where a primary outcome is an adverse or unintended event

addresses: Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry, St Luke's Campus, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK. [email protected]: PMCID: PMC3528446types: Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't© 2012 Warren et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.Adverse consequences of medical interventions are a source of concern, but clinical trials may lack power to detect elevated rates of such events, while observational studies have inherent limitations. Meta-analysis allows the combination of individual studies, which can increase power and provide stronger evidence relating to adverse events. However, meta-analysis of adverse events has associated methodological challenges. The aim of this study was to systematically identify and review the methodology used in meta-analyses where a primary outcome is an adverse or unintended event, following a therapeutic intervention

A prospective multicentre study of pharmacist initiated changes to drug therapy and patient management in acute care government funded hospitals

Aims To determine the cost savings of pharmacist initiated changes to hospitalized patients' drug therapy or management in eight major acute care government funded teaching hospitals in Australia. Methods This was a prospective study performed in eight hospitals examining resource implications of pharmacists' interventions assessed by an independent clinical panel. Pharmacists providing clinical services to inpatients recorded details of interventions, defined as any action that directly resulted in a change to patient management or therapy. An independent clinical review panel, convened at each participating centre, confirmed or rejected the clinical pharmacist's assessment of the impact on length of stay (LOS), readmission probability, medical procedures and laboratory monitoring and quantified the resultant changes, which were then costed. Results A total of 1399 interventions were documented. Eight hundred and thirty-five interventions impacted on drug costs alone. Five hundred and eleven interventions were evaluated by the independent panels with three quarters of these confirmed as having an impact on one or more of: length of stay, readmission probability, medical procedures or laboratory monitoring. There were 96 interventions deemed by the independent panels to have reduced LOS and 156 reduced the potential for readmission. The calculated savings was $263 221 for the eight hospitals during the period of the study. This included$150 307 for length of stay reduction, $111 848 for readmission reduction. Conclusions The annualized cost savings relating to length of stay, readmission, drugs, medical procedures and laboratory monitoring as a result of clinical pharmacist initiated changes to hospitalized patient management or therapy was$4 444 794 for eight major acute care government funded teaching hospitals in Australia