Abstract
Purpose
To explore how Thai patients assess symptoms as adverse drug reactions (ADRs).
Methods
Out-patients at two hospitals in Thailand previously reporting suspected ADRs to statins were purposively selected to cover factors relevant to the accuracy of ADR reports. Semi-structured interviews explored the mechanisms participants used to work out whether their symptoms were related to their statin. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and independently thematically analyzed by two researchers.
Results
One hundred interviews were suitable for analysis; 52 were male, age range was 36 to 77 years (mean ± S.D.: 59.83 ± 9.14) and most (92) were taking other medicines in addition to statins. Patient assessment of symptoms as ADRs fell into two major themes: medicine-related factors and external factors. Timing relationships were mentioned most frequently (74), followed by information received (55), seeing similar symptoms in others (7) and diagnosis through blood tests (4). Use of multiple medicines, consideration of the medicine versus diseases, symptoms occurring with more than one medicine or relieved through treatment reduced confidence in ADR attribution. Many participants proposed alternative explanations for symptoms, including old age. Lack of information and knowledge were obstacles to the assessment process.
Conclusions
Patients assessed possible ADRs most often by considering timing relationships. While they also used medicine information, Thai patients received inadequate information to help them assess their symptoms. Patients expressed uncertainty and difficulties in deciding attribution when concomitant medicines and diseases were involved. The findings could support the development of a patient-friendly systematic tool for identifying and assessing possible ADRs.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
McLernon DJ, Bond CM, Hannaford PC, Watson MC, Lee AJ, Hazell L, Avery A, on behalf of the Yellow Card C (2010) Adverse drug reaction reporting in the UK: A retrospective observational comparison of Yellow Card reports submitted by patients and healthcare professionals. Drug Saf 33(9):775–788. doi:10.2165/11536510-000000000-00000
World Health Organization (2000) Consumer reporting of adverse drug reactions. WHO Drug Inf 14(4):211–215
Aagaard L, Nielsen LH, Hansen EH (2009) Consumer reporting of adverse drug reactions: A retrospective analysis of the Danish adverse drug reaction database from 2004 to 2006. Drug Saf 32(11):1067–1074. doi:10.2165/11316680-000000000-00000
Fernandopulle RBM, Weerasuriya K (2003) What can consumer adverse drug reaction reporting add to existing health professional- based systems?: focus on the developing world. Drug Saf 26(4):219–225. doi:10.3310/hta15200
Avery A, Anderson C, Bond C, Fortnum H, Gifford A, Hannaford P, Hazell L, Krska J, Lee A, McLernon D, Murphy E, Shakir S, Watson M (2011) Evaluation of patient reporting of adverse drug reactions to the UK 'Yellow Card Scheme': literature review, descriptive and qualitative analyses, and questionnaire surveys. Health Technol Assess 15(20):1–234
de Langen J, van Hunsel F, Passier A, de Jong-vanden Berg L, van Grootheest K (2008) Adverse drug reaction reporting by patients in the Netherlands: three years of experience. Drug Saf 31(6):515–524
US FDA (June 2012) AERS reporting by healthcare providers and consumers by year. http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Surveillance/AdverseDrugEffects/ucm070456.htm. Accessed 7 Mar 2013
Danish Medicine Agency (2011) The Danish Medicine Agency’s annual pharmacovigilance report 2010. http://laegemiddelstyrelsen.dk/~/media/BAC4DA2950FF4AE1BC6D559EC35AFB3B.ashx. Accessed 7 Mar 2013
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (2012) MHRA annual statistics 2011/12. http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/groups/comms-ic/documents/websiteresources/con224445.pdf. Accessed 15 Mar 2013
Inch J, Watson MC, Anakwe-Umeh S, on behalf of the Yellow Card Study C (2012) Patient versus Healthcare Professional Spontaneous Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting: A Systematic Review. Drug Saf 35(10):807–818. doi:10.2165/11631650-000000000-00000
van Grootheest K, de Graaf L, de Jong-van den Berg LTW (2003) Consumer adverse drug reaction reporting: A new step in pharmacovigilance? Drug Saf 26(4):211–217
Leone R, Moretti U, D’Incau P, Conforti A, Magro L, Lora R, Velo G (2013) Effect of pharmacist involvement on patient reporting of adverse drug reactions: first Italian study. Drug Saf 36(4):267–276. doi:10.1007/s40264-013-0028-8
van Grootheest AC, Passier JL, van Puijenbroek EP (2005) Direct reporting of side effects by the patient: favourable experience in the first year. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 149(10):529–533
Medawar C, Herxheimer A (2003) A comparison of adverse drug reaction reports from prefessionals and users, relating to risk of dependence and suicidal behaviour with paroxetine. Int J Risk Saf Med 16:5–19
Jarernsiripornkul N, Senacom P, Uchaipichat V, Chaipichit N, Krska J (2012) Patient reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions to antiepileptic drugs: factors affecting attribution accuracy. Epilepsy Behav 24(1):102–106. doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2012.03.023
Mannesse CK, Derkx FH, de Ridder MA, Man in ’t Veld AJ, van der Cammen TJ (2000) Do older hospital patients recognize adverse drug reactions? Age Ageing 29(1):79–81
Fisher S, Bryant SG (1990) Postmarketing surveillance: accuracy of patient drug attribution judgments. Clin Pharmacol Ther 48(1):102–107
Jarernsiripornkul N, Krska J, Capps PA, Richards RM, Lee A (2002) Patient reporting of potential adverse drug reactions: a methodological study. Br J Clin Pharmacol 53(3):318–325
Jarernsiripornkul N, Kakaew W, Loalukkana W, Krska J (2009) Adverse drug reaction monitoring: comparing doctor and patient reporting for new drugs. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 18(3):240–245
Jarernsiripornkul N, Chaisrisawadsuk S, Chaiyakum A, Krska J (2009) Patient self-reporting of potential adverse drug reactions to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in Thailand. Pharm World Sci 31(5):559–564
Salinsky MC, Storzbach D (2005) The Portland Neurotoxicity Scale: validation of a brief self-report measure of antiepileptic-drug-related neurotoxicity. Assessment 12(1):107–117. doi:10.1177/1073191104272857
Lapshin O, Skinner CJ, Finkelstein J (2006) How do psychiatric patients perceive the side effects of their medications? German J Psychiatry 9:74–93
World Health Organization (2012) Safety monitoring of medical products: reporting system for the general public. WHO Press. http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/en/m/abstract/Js19132en/. Accessed 8 Mar 2013
DeWitt JE, Sorofman BA (1999) A model for understanding patient attribution of adverse drug reaction symptoms. Drug Inf J 33(3):907–920
Turner JA, Deyo RA, Loeser JD, Von Korff M, Fordyce WE (1994) The importance of placebo effects in pain treatment and research. JAMA 271(20):1609–1614
Barsky AJ, Saintfort R, Rogers MP, Borus JF (2002) Nonspecific medication side effects and the nocebo phenomenon. JAMA 287(5):622–627
Lorimer S, Cox A, Langford NJ (2011) A patient’s perspective: the impact of adverse drug reactions on patients and their views on reporting. J Clin Pharm Ther 37(2):148–152. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2710.2011.01258.x
Krska J, Anderson C, Murphy E, Avery AJ, on behalf of the Yellow Card Study C (2011) How patient reporters identify adverse drug reactions: A qualitative study of reporting via the UK Yellow Card Scheme. Drug Saf 34(5):429–436. doi:10.2165/11589320-000000000-00000
de Vries ST, Mol PG, de Zeeuw D, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM, Denig P (2013) Development and initial validation of a patient-reported adverse drug event questionnaire. Drug Saf. doi:10.1007/s40264-013-0036-8
Agbabiaka TB, Savovic J, Ernst E (2008) Methods for causality assessment of adverse drug reactions: A systematic review. Drug Saf 31(1):21–37
Butt TF, Cox AR, Lewis H, Ferner RE (2011) Patient experiences of serious adverse drug reactions and their attitudes to medicines: a qualitative study of survivors of Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis in the UK. Drug Saf 34(4):319–328. doi:10.2165/11588460-000000000-00000
Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 3:77–101
Cohen DJ, Crabtree BF (2008) Evaluative criteria for qualitative research in health care: controversies and recommendations. Ann Fam Med 6(4):331–339. doi:10.1370/afm.818
Fereday J, Muir-Cochrane E (2006) Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. Int J Qual Methods 5(1):1–11
Casula M, Tragni E, Catapano AL (2012) Adherence to lipid-lowering treatment: the patient perspective. Patient Prefer Adherence 6:805–814
Silva MA, Swanson AC, Gandhi PJ, Tataronis GR (2006) Statin-related adverse events: a meta-analysis. Clin Ther 28(1):26–35
Ziegler DK, Mosier MC, Buenaver M, Okuyemi K (2001) How much information about adverse effects of medication do patients want from physicians? Arch Intern Med 161(5):706–713
van Hunsel F, ten Berge E, Borgsteede S, van Grootheest K (2010) What motivates patients to report an adverse drug reaction? Ann Pharmacother 44(5):936–937. doi:10.1345/aph.1M632
Lampela P, Hartikainen S, Sulkava R, Huupponen R (2007) Adverse drug effects in elderly people- a disparity between clinical examination and adverse effects self- reported by the patient. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 63:509–515
Mitchell AS, Henry DA, Sanson-Fisher R, O’Connell DL (1988) Patients as a direct source of information on adverse drug reactions. BMJ 297(6653):891–893
Acknowledgments
This study received financial support from the Royal Golden Jubilee Ph.D. Programme and the Graduate School, Khon Kaen University. The funding organizations had no role in the design and conduct of the study; in the collection, management, analysis and interpretation of the data; or in the preparation, review or approval of the manuscript.
Special thanks are expressed to all patients who were involved in semi-structured interviews at Srinagarind hospital and Queen Sirikit Heart Center.
The authors would like to thank Dr. Ruth Rodgers and Arunrot Patsuree for their valuable cooperation in validation of translation.
Contributions of Authors
All authors participated in planning the work that led to the manuscript. NC, JK, and NJ analyzed and interpreted data, wrote the first draft, and made substantive suggestions for revision. All authors approved the final submission version.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chaipichit, N., Krska, J., Pratipanawatr, T. et al. A qualitative study to explore how patients identify and assess symptoms as adverse drug reactions. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 70, 607–615 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-014-1653-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-014-1653-6