Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Pharmacovigilance: empowering healthcare professionals and patients

  • Commentary
  • Published:
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The European Union has thoroughly reformed its pharmacovigilance legislation in July 2012. Despite the changes, underreporting of adverse drug reactions remains a concern. This underreporting seems to be partially associated with incorrect customs and beliefs by healthcare professionals. Therefore, strengthening teaching and training in drug safety monitoring and reporting are essential. Sustained campaigns and education on pharmacovigilance are key elements to enhance its performance and effectiveness. In general, all healthcare professionals as well as patients should be more sensitized and empowered to contribute to pharmacovigilance programmes in order to improve drug safety.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anonymous. European medicines agency. New EU pharmacovigilance legislation—key concepts. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Other/2012/07/WC500129593.pdf Accessed 16 Aug 2013.

  2. Hazell L, Shakir SA. Under-reporting of adverse drug reactions : a systematic review. Drug Saf. 2006;29(5):385–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Williams D, Feely J. Underreporting of adverse drug reactions: attitudes of Irish doctors. Ir J Med Sci. 1999;168(4):257–61.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Irujo M, Beitia G, Bes-Rastrollo M, Figueiras A, Hernández-Díaz S, Lasheras B. Factors that influence under-reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions among community pharmacists in a Spanish region. Drug Saf. 2007;30(11):1073–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Herdeiro MT, Figueiras A, Polónia J, Gestal-Otero JJ. Influence of pharmacists’ attitudes on adverse drug reaction reporting : a case-control study in Portugal. Drug Saf. 2006;29(4):331–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lopez-Gonzalez E, Herdeiro MT, Figueiras A. Determinants of under-reporting of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review. Drug Saf. 2009;32(1):19–31. doi:10.2165/00002018-200932010-00002.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. González-Rubio F, Calderón-Larrañaga A, Poblador-Plou B, Navarro-Pemán C, López-Cabañas A, Prados-Torres A. Underreporting of recognized adverse drug reactions by primary care physicians: an exploratory study. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2011;20(12):1287–94. doi:10.1002/pds.2172.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Avery AJ, Anderson C, Bond CM, Fortnum H, Gifford A, Hannaford PC, et al. 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. 2011;15(20):1–234. doi:10.3310/hta15200.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. van Hunsel F, Härmark L, Pal S, Olsson S, van Grootheest K. Experiences with adverse drug reaction reporting by patients: an 11-country survey. Drug Saf. 2012;35(1):45–60. doi:10.2165/11594320-000000000-00000.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Inch J, Watson MC, Anakwe-Umeh S. Patient versus healthcare professional spontaneous adverse drug reaction reporting: a systematic review. Drug Saf. 2012;35(10):807–18. doi:10.2165/11631650-000000000-00000.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rolfes L, Wilkes S, van Hunsel F, van Puijenbroek E, van Grootheest K. Important information regarding reporting of adverse drug reactions: a qualitative study. Int J Pharm Pract. 2013. doi:10.1111/ijpp.12056.

  12. Durrieu G, Palmaro A, Pourcel L, Caillet C, Faucher A, Jacquet A, et al. First French experience of ADR reporting by patients after a mass immunization campaign with Influenza A (H1N1) pandemic vaccines: a comparison of reports submitted by patients and healthcare professionals. Drug Saf. 2012;35(10):845–54. doi:10.2165/11631800-000000000-00000.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Leone R, Moretti U, D’Incau P, Conforti A, Magro L, Lora R, et al. Effect of pharmacist involvement on patient reporting of adverse drug reactions: first Italian study. Drug Saf. 2013;36(4):267–76. doi:10.1007/s40264-013-0028-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Marques J, Ribeiro-Vaz I, Pereira AC, Polónia J. A survey of spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions in 10 years of activity in a pharmacovigilance centre in Portugal. Int J Pharm Pract. 2014;22(4):275–82. doi:10.1111/ijpp.12078.

  15. Moore N. The past, present and perhaps future of pharmacovigilance: homage to Folke Sjoqvist. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2013;69(Suppl 1):33–41. doi:10.1007/s00228-013-1486-8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Biagi C, Montanaro N, Buccellato E, Roberto G, Vaccheri A, Motola D. Underreporting in pharmacovigilance: an intervention for Italian GPs (Emilia-Romagna region). Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2013;69(2):237–44. doi:10.1007/s00228-012-1321-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gonzalez-Gonzalez C, Lopez-Gonzalez E, Herdeiro MT, Figueiras A. Strategies to improve adverse drug reaction reporting: a critical and systematic review. Drug Saf. 2013;36(5):317–28. doi:10.1007/s40264-013-0058-2.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Pal SN, Duncombe C, Falzon D, Olsson S. WHO strategy for collecting safety data in public health programmes: complementing spontaneous reporting systems. Drug Saf. 2013;36(2):75–81. doi:10.1007/s40264-012-0014-6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. White RW, Harpaz R, Shah NH, DuMouchel W, Horvitz E. Toward enhanced pharmacovigilance using patient-generated data on the internet. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2014;96(2):239–46. doi:10.1038/clpt.2014.77.

  20. Pontes H, Clément M, Rollason V. Safety signal detection: the relevance of literature review. Drug Saf. 2014;37(7):471–9. doi:10.1007/s40264-014-0180-9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy (ESCP) for having supported the workshop “Adverse Drug Reactions—Applying Theory to Practice” at the 41st ESCP Symposium in October 2012. We are also grateful to the participants of the workshop for completing the survey.

Funding

None.

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, UZ Brussel and Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090, Jette, Brussels, Belgium

    Stephane Steurbaut

  2. Department of Pharmacy, Hamad General Hospital, P.O. Box 3050, Doha, Qatar

    Yolande Hanssens

Authors
  1. Stephane Steurbaut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yolande Hanssens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Steurbaut, S., Hanssens, Y. Pharmacovigilance: empowering healthcare professionals and patients. Int J Clin Pharm 36, 859–862 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-014-0004-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-014-0004-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation