Pharmacy study of natural health product adverse reactions (SONAR): a cross-sectional study using active surveillance in community pharmacies to detect adverse events associated with natural health products and assess causality

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the rates and causality of adverse event(s) (AE) associated with natural health product (NHP) use, prescription drug use and concurrent NHP-drug use through active surveillance in community pharmacies. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of screened patients. SETTING: 10 community pharmacies across Alberta and British Columbia, Canada from 14 January to 30 July 2011. PARTICIPANTS: The participating pharmacy staff screened consecutive patients, or agents of patients, who were dropping or picking up prescription medications.PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients were screened to determine the proportions of them using prescription drugs and/or NHPs, as well as their respective AE rates. All AEs reported by the screened patients who took a NHP, consented to, and were available for, a detailed telephone interview (14%) were adjudicated fully to assess for causality.RESULTS: Over a total of 105 pharmacy weeks and 1118 patients screened, 410 patients reported taking prescription drugs only (36.7%; 95% CI 33.9% to 39.5%), 37 reported taking NHPs only (3.3%; 95% CI 2.4% to 4.5%) and 657 reported taking prescription drugs and NHPs concurrently (58.8%; 95% CI 55.9% to 61.6%). In total, 54 patients reported an AE, representing 1.2% (95% CI 0.51% to 2.9%), 2.7% (95% CI 0.4% to 16.9%) and 7.3% (95% CI 5.6% to 9.6%) of each population, respectively. Compared with patients who reported using prescription drugs, the patients who reported using prescription drugs and NHPs concurrently were 6.4 times more likely to experience an AE (OR; 95% CI 2.52 to 16.17; p<0.001). Combined with data from Ontario, Canada, a national proportion was calculated, which found that 45.4% (95% CI 43.8% to 47.0%) of Canadians who visit community pharmacies take NHPs and prescription drugs concurrently, and of those, 7.4% (95% CI 6.3% to 8.8%) report an AE.CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of community pharmacy patients use prescription drugs and NHPs concurrently; these patients are at a greater risk of experiencing an AE. Active surveillance provides a means of detecting such AEs and collecting high-quality data on which causality assessment can be based

Study of Natural Health Product Adverse Reactions (SONAR): Active Surveillance of Adverse Events Following Concurrent Natural Health product and Prescription Drug Use in Community Pharmacies

Background: Many consumers use natural health products (NHPs) concurrently with prescription medications. As NHP-related harms are under-reported through passive surveillance, the safety of concurrent NHP-drug use remains unknown. To conduct active surveillance in participating community pharmacies to identify adverse events related to concurrent NHP-prescription drug use. Methodology/Principal Findings: Participating pharmacists asked individuals collecting prescription medications about (i) concurrent NHP/drug use in the previous three months and (ii) experiences of adverse events. If an adverse event was identified and if the patient provided written consent, a research pharmacist conducted a guided telephone interview to gather additional information after obtaining additional verbal consent and documenting so within the interview form. Over a total of 112 pharmacy weeks, 2615 patients were screened, of which 1037 (39.7%; 95% CI: 37.8% to 41.5%) reported concurrent NHP and prescription medication use. A total of 77 patients reported a possible AE (2.94%; 95% CI: 2.4% to 3.7%), which represents 7.4% of those using NHPs and prescription medications concurrently (95%CI: 6.0% to 9.2%). Of 15 patients available for an interview, 4 (26.7%: 95% CI: 4.3% to 49.0%) reported an AE that was determined to be “probably” due to NHP use. Conclusions/Significance: Active surveillance markedly improves identification and reporting of adverse events associated with concurrent NHP-drug use. Although not without challenges, active surveillance is feasible and can generate adverse event data of sufficient quality to allow for meaningful adjudication to assess potential harms

A review of ketamine&rsquo;s role in ECT and non-ECT settings

Vytautas Jankauskas,1 Candace Necyk,2 James Chue,3 Pierre Chue4 1Department of Pharmacy, Grey Nuns Community Hospital, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; 2Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; 3Department of Anesthesiology, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA; 4Clinical Trials and Research Program, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Abstract: Up to 20% of depressed patients demonstrate treatment resistance to one or more adequate antidepressant trials, resulting in a disproportionately high burden of illness. Ketamine is a non-barbiturate, rapid-acting general anesthetic that has been increasingly studied in treatment resistant depression (TRD), typically at sub-anesthetic doses (0.5 mg/kg over 40 min by intravenous infusion). More recent data suggest that ketamine may improve response rates to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) when used as an adjunct, but also as a sole agent. In the ECT setting, a dose of 0.8 mg/kg or greater of ketamine demonstrates improved reduction in depressive symptoms than lower doses; however, inconsistency and significant heterogeneity among studies exists. Clinical predictors of responses to ketamine have been suggested in terms of non-ECT settings. Ketamine does increase seizure duration in ECT, which is attenuated when concomitant barbiturate anesthetics are used. However, most studies are small, with considerable heterogeneity of the sample population and variance in dosing strategies of ketamine, ECT, and concomitant medications, and lack a placebo control, which limits interpretation. Psychotomimetic and cardiovascular adverse effects are reported with ketamine. Cardiovascular adverse effects are particularly relevant when ketamine is used in an ECT setting. Adverse effects may be mitigated with concurrent propofol; however, this adds complexity and cost compared to standard anesthesia. Long-term adverse effects are still unknown, but relevant, given recent class concerns for anesthetic and sedative agents. Keywords: ketamine, ECT, anesthesia, major depressive disorde

Natural Health Product-Drug Interaction Causality Assessment in Pediatric Adverse Event Reports Associated with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Medication

Background: Some pediatric patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) use natural health products (NHPs) such as herbal remedies. Although herbal remedies are generally considered to be safe when they are used appropriately, they may contain active components that can interact with medications being used concurrently, with potential for NHP-drug interactions leading to adverse events. Objectives: The objectives of this study were (1) to identify adverse event reports (AERs) involving commonly used herbal remedies and ADHD prescription medicines in children and adolescents; (2) to evaluate the quality of collected AERs; and (3) to assess whether NHP-drug interactions can be causally linked to reported adverse events. Methods: We systematically searched the FDAble database (FDAble.com) for herbal remedies commonly used by patients (4-18 years old) also taking ADHD drugs from 1997 to 2015. We assessed the completeness of the AERs and used three causality assessment tools modified for NHPs (Naranjo Adverse Drug Reaction Probability Scale, HORN Drug Interaction Probability Scale, and World Health Organization Uppsala Monitoring Centre Scale). Results: Of the 23 identified AERs involving both an herbal remedy and an ADHD prescription medication, most involved multiple (\u3e3) substances with inadequate detail to assess multiple potential interactions. Following data extraction and evaluation of completeness, five AERs involving only one herbal remedy and one ADHD medication were evaluated for causality. An NHP-drug interaction was assessed to be probable in one case and to be possible in another. Both these reports involved a methylphenidate formulation and St. John\u27s wort. Conclusions: Eighteen of the 23 identified AERs involving both an herbal remedy and an ADHD drug also involved other multiple ingredient products. The reporting quality was poor for the five AERs examined. Further research is needed to study the interaction between St. John\u27s wort and methylphenidate

Pharmacy standardized patient screening form.

<p>Pharmacy standardized patient screening form.</p