Protocol for a prospective observational study of adverse drug reactions of antiepileptic drugs in children in the UK

Background Epilepsy is a common chronic disease of children that can be treated with anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs). AEDs, however, have significant side effects. Newer AEDs are thought to have fewer side effects. There have, however, been few comparative studies of AED toxicity. The aim is to compare the safety profile of the most frequently used AEDs by performing a multicentre prospective cohort study. This protocol describes the planned study. Design A multicentre prospective cohort study of children on AED treatment in hospitals across the UK. Ethical approval will be obtained. Sample size Three thousand children on treatment for epilepsy will be recruited from paediatric clinics. It is expected that this sample size will have the potential to compare toxicity between the most frequently used AEDs. Duration of study 24 months. Outcome measure Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to AEDs. These will be identified by the use of a validated questionnaire, the Paediatric Epilepsy Side Effect Questionnaire. They will be evaluated using the Naranjo algorithm. Preventability will be assessed using the Schumock and Thornton scale. Discussion Toxicity of individual AEDs when given as monotherapy and polytherapy will be determined. Additionally, discontinuation rates due to ADRs will be determined. The data will assist clinicians in choosing AEDs with the least toxicity

Safety of antiepileptic drugs in children and young people: a prospective cohort study

Purpose: This study aims to describe the incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in children receiving antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and compare ADRs to the individual drugs when given as monotherapy. Method: Paediatric patients (≤18 years old) were enrolled for this prospective observational study over a 6-month period, between September 2015 and March 2016. Adverse reactions to antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) were elicited at the time of enrolment and after 3 months using the Paediatric Epilepsy Side Effects Questionnaire. Results: A total of 1139 suspected ADRs were reported in 124 participants. Eighteen different AEDs were prescribed. Sixty-six children (53%) were receiving AED monotherapy at the time of recruitment; 34/66 (52%) of whom received new generation AEDs. Levetiracetam was the most frequently prescribed AED (62/124, 50%). When only children receiving AED monotherapy were considered, fatigue, drowsiness, weight gain, dizziness were less likely with levetiracetam (p < .01). Slow thinking and decreased concentration were less likely with levetiracetam or carbamazepine than valproic acid (p < .05). Five patients (four on polytherapy) discontinued AED treatment due to ADRs and 2 had a dose reduction. Conclusions: Levetiracetam and carbamazepine were better tolerated than sodium valproate

Adverse drug reactions in Ghanaian children: review of reports from 2000 to 2012 in VigiBase

Objective: The aim of this article is to describe adverse drug reactions (ADRs) reported for children aged 0 - 17 years in Ghana. Methods: Paediatric reports submitted by the Ghana National Centre for Pharmacovigilance to the World Health Organisation (WHO) Global ADR database, VigiBase up to December 2012 were extracted. The data were analysed for number of reports per year, types of reporters and suspected ADRs and drugs. Results: A total of 343 reports for children were received during the period. The drug classes most frequently reported were vaccines (115, 31%), antimalarials (106, 28%) and antibiotics (57, 15%). Of the top 20 individual drugs, 19 were anti-infectives. The most frequently reported ADRs were injection site infection, fever and rash. There were 23 deaths reported, and antimalarials were implicated in 12 cases. Conclusions: Vaccines, antimalarials and antibiotics are the leading medicines reported to cause ADRs in Ghanaian children. There was a high mortality rate, with many of the deaths due to causes explained in the individual case safety reports

Why do young children die in the UK?: a comparison with Sweden

Background The UK has a high child mortality rate, whereas Sweden’s is lower (under-five mortality rates of five and three, respectively, in 2011).We therefore wished to compare causes of death in young children aged <5 years in the two countries. Methods Under-five mortality data were obtained from the Office of National Statistics for each of the individual countries within the UK for 3 years (2006–2008). Data for Sweden for the same period were obtained from the National Board of Health and Welfare. Causes of death were compared statistically using χ2 test. Results There were a total of 14 104 and 1036 deaths aged <5 years in the UK and Sweden, respectively, between 2006 and 2008. The total numbers of live births during the same period were 2 295 964 and 315 884, respectively. The overall mortality rate in the UK was 614 per 100 000 children which was significantly higher than that in Sweden (328; p<0.001). The mortality rates for the three main causes of death in the UK ( prematurity, congenital malformations and infections) were 138.5, 112.1 and 63.9, respectively, per 100 000 children. The mortality rates for the same three conditions in Sweden were 10.1, 88.6 and 34.8, respectively. They were all significantly more frequent in the UK than in Sweden (p<0.001), as were the majority of the disorders. Treatable infections, such as pneumonia, meningitis and septicaemia, in both neonates and young children had significantly higher mortality rates in the UK than in Sweden ( p<0.001). Conclusions In order to reduce the mortality rate in the UK, we need to try and reduce the causes of prematurity. Additionally, the care of children with treatable infections should be reviewed to understand ways in which to reduce the differences in mortality seen

A large-scale examination of the effectiveness of anonymous marking in reducing group performance differences in higher education assessment

The present research aims to more fully explore the issues of performance differences in higher education assessment, particularly in the context of a common measure taken to address them. The rationale for the study is that, while performance differences in written examinations are relatively well researched, few studies have examined the efficacy of anonymous marking in reducing these performance differences, particularly in modern student populations. By examining a large archive (N = 30674) of assessment data spanning a twelve-year period, the relationship between assessment marks and factors such as ethnic group, gender and socio-environmental background was investigated. In particular, analysis focused on the impact that the implementation of anonymous marking for assessment of written examinations and coursework has had on the magnitude of mean score differences between demographic groups of students. While group differences were found to be pervasive in higher education assessment, these differences were observed to be relatively small in practical terms. Further, it appears that the introduction of anonymous marking has had a negligible effect in reducing them. The implications of these results are discussed, focusing on two issues, firstly a defence of examinations as a fair and legitimate form of assessment in Higher Education, and, secondly, a call for the re-examination of the efficacy of anonymous marking in reducing group performance differences