Dataset Information

Implementation of adverse event reporting for medical devices, India.

ABSTRACT: Problem:Rapid growth in the use of medical devices has drawn attention to gaps in the systematic monitoring of medical device-associated adverse events in India. Approach:Implementation of national regulations on medical devices started in January 2018. Supported by a nationwide network of monitoring centres, the Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission coordinates adverse event reports from manufacturers, legal representatives and patients or users. The commission follows-up and reviews reports with subject expert groups and sends recommendations on necessary action to the national regulatory authority. Local setting:Before 2015, no systematic structure was in place to collate adverse events associated with medical devices. Several reports of deaths and hospitalization due to faulty hip implants, cardiac stents and poor-quality devices prompted the health ministry to launch the materiovigilance programme. Relevant changes:From July 2015 to October 2019, the commission received 1931 adverse event reports, mostly from marketing authorization holders; 1277 were serious events. Reporting increased markedly after 2017. Cardiac stents were the most reported device (926 events; 47.95%). To encourage a culture of reporting, the commission has raised awareness about the programme among stakeholders, developed user-friendly reporting tools and guidelines, and conducted training for hospital personnel on medical device adverse event reporting. Lessons learnt:Regular training to stakeholders develops a sense of responsibility towards reporting medical device adverse events and ensures quality data reporting. Reporters must be assured that reporting adverse events does not have any legal implications for them and given acknowledgement of their role in high-quality device associated adverse event reporting.

SUBMITTER: Shukla S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7047028 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Implementation of adverse event reporting for medical devices, India.

Shukla Shatrunajay S Gupta Madhur M Pandit Sabitri S Thomson Milu M Shivhare Abhimanyu A Kalaiselvan Vivekanandan V Singh Gyanendra Nath GN

Bulletin of the World Health Organization 20191118 3

<h4>Problem</h4>Rapid growth in the use of medical devices has drawn attention to gaps in the systematic monitoring of medical device-associated adverse events in India.<h4>Approach</h4>Implementation of national regulations on medical devices started in January 2018. Supported by a nationwide network of monitoring centres, the Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission coordinates adverse event reports from manufacturers, legal representatives and patients or users. The commission follows-up and reviews r ...[more]

PMID: 32132755

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTaxanes are an essential class of antineoplastic agents used to treat various cancers and are a fundamental cause of hypersensitivity reactions. In addition, other adverse events, such as bone marrow toxicity and peripheral neuropathy, can lead to chemotherapy discontinuation. This study aimed to evaluate the safety of taxanes in the real world.MethodsTaxane-associated adverse events were identified by the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities Preferred Terms and analyzed and compared by mining the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System pharmacovigilance database from January 2004 to December 2019. Reported adverse events, such as hypersensitivity reaction, bone marrow toxicity, and peripheral neuropathy, were analyzed with the following signal detection algorithms: reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR), multi-item gamma Poisson shrinker (MGPS), Bayesian confidence propagation neural network (BCPNN), and logistic regression methods. Adverse outcome events and death outcome rates were compared between different taxane groups using Pearson's χ2 test, whereas significance was determined at P < 0.05 with a 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsA total of 966 reports of hypersensitivity reactions, 1109 reports of bone marrow toxicity, and 1374 reports of peripheral neuropathy were analyzed. Compared with paclitaxel and docetaxel, bone marrow toxicity following the use of nab-paclitaxel had the highest ROR of 6.45 (95% two-sided CI, 6.05-6.88), PRR of 5.66, (χ2 = 4342.98), information component of 2.50 (95% one-sided CI = 2.34), and empirical Bayes geometric mean of 5.64 (95% one-sided CI = 5.34). Peripheral neuropathy following the use of nab-paclitaxel showed a higher ROR of 12.78 (95% two-sided CI, 11.55-14.14), PRR of 12.16 (χ2 = 4060.88), information component of 3.59 (95% one-sided CI = 3.25), and empirical Bayes geometric mean of 12.07 (95% one-sided CI = 11.09).ConclusionsThe results showed that bone marrow toxicity and peripheral neuropathy were the major adverse events induced by taxanes. Nab-paclitaxel exhibited the highest potential for taxane-associated adverse events. Further research in the future is warranted to explain taxane-associated adverse effects in real-world circumstances.

Project description:An important challenge to spontaneous reporting system is underreporting. The sensitization and involvement of undergraduate medical students can reduce underreporting in pharmacovigilance program.To analyze the clinical characteristics and reporting quality of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) by undergraduate medical students in comparison with physicians' reporting.We sensitized the second professional year undergraduate medical students about pharmacovigilance and asked them to submit reports of ADR observed during their clinical posting from January to December 2015. We compared students' reports with those sent by physicians (Department of Medicine and Allied Branches, Paediatric, Obstetrics and Gynaecology) of our institute during the same time period. We included ADRs of "certain," "probable," or "possible" categories as per the World Health Organization causality definitions in analysis of both groups. We excluded "unlikely," "unclassified," and "unclassifiable" causality ADRs from the analysis due to questionable association of reactions with suspected drugs. We collected data of demographics, pattern of ADRs, causative drugs, seriousness, other clinical characteristics, and quality of reporting.We analyzed a total number of 176 students' reports having 269 ADRs and 143 physicians' reports covering 180 ADRs. The students predominantly reported ADRs of single drug suspect (84.09% vs. 43.35%), "probable" causality (63.94% vs. 21.11), and augmented type reactions (67.29% vs. 55%) than physicians. Both groups did not differ in reporting of serious reactions (6.25% vs. 9.09%). Students most frequently suspected gastrointestinal disorders (35.68%), whereas physicians most frequently reported skin and appendages disorders (41.11%). Students and physicians more commonly suspected ADRs due to systemic anti-infective (33.64%) and nervous system (42.07%) class of drugs, respectively. The quality analysis suggested no substantial difference in most domains of ADR reporting among both groups.Students' reported valuable and clinically relevant ADRs. Medical students should be exposed to ADR reporting during their clinical teaching posting and should be actively involved in pharmacovigilance program to improve detection rate.

Dataset Information

Implementation of adverse event reporting for medical devices, India.

Publications

Implementation of adverse event reporting for medical devices, India.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets