Dataset Information

Evaluating adverse drug event reporting in administrative data from emergency departments: a validation study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Adverse drug events are a frequent cause of emergency department presentations. Administrative data could be used to identify patients presenting with adverse drug events for post-market surveillance, and to conduct research in patient safety and in drug safety and effectiveness. However, such data sources have not been evaluated for their completeness with regard to adverse drug event reporting. Our objective was to determine the proportion of adverse drug events to outpatient medications diagnosed at the point-of-care in emergency departments that were documented in administrative data.

Methods

We linked the records of patients enrolled in a prospective observational cohort study on adverse drug events conducted in two Canadian tertiary care emergency departments to their administrative data. We compared the number of adverse drug events diagnosed and recorded at the point-of-care in the prospective study with the number of adverse drug events recorded in the administrative data.

Results

Among 1574 emergency department visits, 221 were identified as adverse drug event-related in the prospective database. We found 15 adverse drug events documented in administrative records with ICD-10 codes clearly indicating an adverse drug event, indicating a sensitivity of 6.8% (95% CI 4.0-11.2%) of this code set. When the ICD-10 code categories were broadened to include codes indicating a very likely, likely or possible adverse event to a medication, 62 of 221 events were identifiable in administrative data, corresponding to a sensitivity of 28.1% (95% CI 22.3-34.6%).

Conclusions

Adverse drug events to outpatient medications were underreported in emergency department administrative data compared to the number of adverse drug events diagnosed and recorded at the point-of-care.

SUBMITTER: Hohl CM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3842633 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluating adverse drug event reporting in administrative data from emergency departments: a validation study.

Hohl Corinne M CM Kuramoto Lisa L Yu Eugenia E Rogula Basia B Stausberg Jürgen J Sobolev Boris B

BMC health services research 20131112

<h4>Background</h4>Adverse drug events are a frequent cause of emergency department presentations. Administrative data could be used to identify patients presenting with adverse drug events for post-market surveillance, and to conduct research in patient safety and in drug safety and effectiveness. However, such data sources have not been evaluated for their completeness with regard to adverse drug event reporting. Our objective was to determine the proportion of adverse drug events to outpatien ...[more]

PMID: 24219303

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is a high degree of variability in assessing the preventability of adverse drug events, limiting the ability to compare rates of preventable adverse drug events across different studies. We compared three methods for determining preventability of adverse drug events in emergency department patients and explored their strengths and weaknesses.MethodsThis mixed-methods study enrolled emergency department patients diagnosed with at least one adverse drug event from three prior prospective studies. A clinical pharmacist and physician reviewed the medical and research records of all patients, and independently rated each event's preventability using a "best practice-based" approach, an "error-based" approach, and an "algorithm-based" approach. Raters discussed discordant ratings until reaching consensus. We assessed the inter-rater agreement between clinicians using the same assessment method, and between different assessment methods using Cohen's kappa with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Qualitative researchers observed discussions, took field notes, and reviewed free text comments made by clinicians in a "comment" box in the data collection form. We developed a coding structure and iteratively analyzed qualitative data for emerging themes regarding the application of each preventability assessment method using NVivo.ResultsAmong 1356 adverse drug events, a best practice-based approach rated 64.1% (95% CI: 61.5-66.6%) of events as preventable, an error-based approach rated 64.3% (95% CI: 61.8-66.9%) of events as preventable, and an algorithm-based approach rated 68.8% (95% CI: 66.1-71.1%) of events as preventable. When applying the same method, the inter-rater agreement between clinicians was 0.53 (95% CI: 0.48-0.59), 0.55 (95%CI: 0.50-0.60) and 0.55 (95% CI: 0.49-0.55) for the best practice-, error-, and algorithm-based approaches, respectively. The inter-rater agreement between different assessment methods using consensus ratings for each ranged between 0.88 (95% CI 0.85-0.91) and 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-1.00). Compared to a best practice-based assessment, clinicians believed the algorithm-based assessment was too rigid. It did not account for the complexities of and variations in clinical practice, and frequently was too definitive when assigning preventability ratings.ConclusionThere was good agreement between all three methods of determining the preventability of adverse drug events. However, clinicians found the algorithmic approach constraining, and preferred a best practice-based assessment method.

Project description:BackgroundSpontaneous reporting systems (SRSs) have been increasingly established to collect adverse drug events for fostering adverse drug reaction (ADR) detection and analysis research. SRS data contain personal information, and so their publication requires data anonymization to prevent the disclosure of individuals' privacy. We have previously proposed a privacy model called MS(k, θ*)-bounding and the associated MS-Anonymization algorithm to fulfill the anonymization of SRS data. In the real world, the SRS data usually are released periodically (eg, FDA Adverse Event Reporting System [FAERS]) to accommodate newly collected adverse drug events. Different anonymized releases of SRS data available to the attacker may thwart our single-release-focus method, that is, MS(k, θ*)-bounding.ObjectiveWe investigate the privacy threat caused by periodical releases of SRS data and propose anonymization methods to prevent the disclosure of personal privacy information while maintaining the utility of published data.MethodsWe identify potential attacks on periodical releases of SRS data, namely, BFL-attacks, mainly caused by follow-up cases. We present a new privacy model called PPMS(k, θ*)-bounding, and propose the associated PPMS-Anonymization algorithm and 2 improvements: PPMS+-Anonymization and PPMS++-Anonymization. Empirical evaluations were performed using 32 selected FAERS quarter data sets from 2004Q1 to 2011Q4. The performance of the proposed versions of PPMS-Anonymization was inspected against MS-Anonymization from some aspects, including data distortion, measured by normalized information loss; privacy risk of anonymized data, measured by dangerous identity ratio and dangerous sensitivity ratio; and data utility, measured by the bias of signal counting and strength (proportional reporting ratio).ResultsThe best version of PPMS-Anonymization, PPMS++-Anonymization, achieves nearly the same quality as MS-Anonymization in both privacy protection and data utility. Overall, PPMS++-Anonymization ensures zero privacy risk on record and attribute linkage, and exhibits 51%-78% and 59%-82% improvements on information loss over PPMS+-Anonymization and PPMS-Anonymization, respectively, and significantly reduces the bias of ADR signal.ConclusionsThe proposed PPMS(k, θ*)-bounding model and PPMS-Anonymization algorithm are effective in anonymizing SRS data sets in the periodical data publishing scenario, preventing the series of releases from disclosing personal sensitive information caused by BFL-attacks while maintaining the data utility for ADR signal detection.

Project description:BackgroundAdministrative health data are increasingly used to detect adverse drug events (ADEs). However, the few studies evaluating diagnostic codes for ADE detection demonstrated low sensitivity, likely due to narrow code sets, physician under-recognition of ADEs, and underreporting in administrative data. The objective of this study was to determine if combining an expanded ICD code set in administrative data with e-prescribing data improves ADE detection.MethodsWe conducted a prospective cohort study among patients newly prescribed antidepressant or antihypertensive medication in primary care and followed for 2 months. Gold standard ADEs were defined as patient-reported symptoms adjudicated as medication-related by a clinical expert. Potential ADEs in administrative data were defined as physician, ED, or hospital visits during follow-up for known adverse effects of the study medication, as identified by ICD codes. Potential ADEs in e-prescribing data were defined as study drug discontinuations or dose changes made during follow-up for safety or effectiveness reasons.ResultsOf 688 study participants, 445 (64.7%) were female and mean age was 64.2 (SD 13.9). The study drug for 386 (56.1%) patients was an antihypertensive, and for 302 (43.9%) an antidepressant. Using the gold standard definition, 114 (16.6%) patients experienced an ADE, with 40 (10.4%) among antihypertensive users and 74 (24.5%) among antidepressant users. The sensitivity of the expanded ICD code set was 7.0%, of e-prescribing data 9.7%, and of the two combined 14.0%. Specificities were high (86.0-95.0%). The sensitivity of the combined approach increased to 25.8% when analysis was restricted to the 27% of patients who indicated having reported symptoms to a physician.ConclusionCombining an expanded diagnostic code set with e-prescribing data improves ADE detection. As few patients report symptoms to their physician, higher detection rates may be achieved by collecting patient-reported outcomes via emerging digital technologies such as patient portals and mHealth applications.

Dataset Information

Evaluating adverse drug event reporting in administrative data from emergency departments: a validation study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Evaluating adverse drug event reporting in administrative data from emergency departments: a validation study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets