Under-Reporting of Adverse Drug Reactions
Top Cited Papers
- 1 January 2006
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Nature in Drug Safety
- Vol. 29 (5) , 385-396
- https://doi.org/10.2165/00002018-200629050-00003
Abstract
The purpose of this review was to estimate the extent of under-reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to spontaneous reporting systems and to investigate whether there are differences between different types of ADRs. A systematic literature search was carried out to identify studies providing a numerical estimate of under-reporting. Studies were included regardless of the methodology used or the setting, e.g. hospital versus general practice. Estimates of under-reporting were either extracted directly from the published study or calculated from the study data. These were expressed as the percentage of ADRs detected from intensive data collection that were not reported to the relevant local, regional or national spontaneous reporting systems. The median under-reporting rate was calculated across all studies and within subcategories of studies using different methods or settings. In total, 37 studies using a wide variety of surveillance methods were identified from 12 countries. These generated 43 numerical estimates of under-reporting. The median under-reporting rate across the 37 studies was 94% (interquartile range 82–98%). There was no significant difference in the median under-reporting rates calculated for general practice and hospital-based studies. Five of the ten general practice studies provided evidence of a higher median under-reporting rate for all ADRs compared with more serious or severe ADRs (95% and 80%, respectively). In comparison, for five of the eight hospital-based studies the median under-reporting rate for more serious or severe ADRs remained high (95%). The median under-reporting rate was lower for 19 studies investigating specific serious/severe ADR-drug combinations but was still high at 85%. This systematic review provides evidence of significant and widespread under-reporting of ADRs to spontaneous reporting systems including serious or severe ADRs. Further work is required to assess the impact of under-reporting on public health decisions and the effects of initiatives to improve reporting such as internet reporting, pharmacist/nurse reporting and direct patient reporting as well as improved education and training of healthcare professionals.Keywords
This publication has 64 references indexed in Scilit:
- An Assessment of the Publicly Disseminated Evidence of Safety Used in Decisions to Withdraw Medicinal Products from the UK and US MarketsDrug Safety, 2006
- Physicians??? Attitudes and Adverse Drug Reaction ReportingDrug Safety, 2005
- Evaluation of the Extent of Under-Reporting of Serious Adverse Drug ReactionsDrug Safety, 2004
- On the assessment of adverse drug reactions from spontaneous reporting systems: the influence of under‐reporting on odds ratiosStatistics in Medicine, 2002
- Use of proportional reporting ratios (PRRs) for signal generation from spontaneous adverse drug reaction reportsPharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, 2001
- Detection and incidence of drug‐induced liver injuries in hospital: a prospective analysis from laboratory signalsBritish Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2000
- Attitudinal survey of voluntary reporting of adverse drug reactionsBritish Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 1999
- Adverse drug reactions in a hospital general medical unit meriting notification to the Committee on Safety of MedicinesBritish Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 1996
- A Prospective Intensive Study of Adverse Drug Reactions in Urban General PracticeClinical Drug Investigation, 1995
- OSTEITIS AND OTHER COMPLICATIONS CAUSED BY GENERALIZED BCG‐ITISActa Paediatrica, 1982