scholarly journals Metamizole Use in Children: Analysis of Drug Utilisation and Adverse Drug Reactions at a German University Hospital between 2015 and 2020

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Zahn ◽  
Sonja Eberl ◽  
Wolfgang Rödle ◽  
Wolfgang Rascher ◽  
Antje Neubert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Drug Reactions ◽  
Drug Utilisation ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Drug Reactions

scholarly journals INTRAVENOUS APPLICATION OF HELIXOR® IN GYNECOLOGICAL ONCOLOGY: IS IT SAFE?

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (10) ◽  
pp. 307-312
Author(s):  
Yong-Il Ji
Keyword(s):  
Observational Study ◽  
Adverse Drug Reactions ◽  
Gynecological Cancer ◽  
Viscum Album ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Drug Reactions ◽  
Gynecological Oncology ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Therapeutic Outcomes ◽  
Efficacy Studies

Background: Traditional mistletoe (Viscum album L.) therapy has been frequently used in patients with cancer in Europe. The different mistletoe formulations available for oncological use are Iscador®, Iscucin®, AbnovaViscum®, and Lektinol®, as well as Helixor®, which may improve therapeutic outcomes following intravenous (i.v.) administration and therefore, is becoming more commonly used. Method: I conducted an observational study in four different University Hospital Centers and the frequency of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) induced by the i.v. infusion of Helixor® was determined. Result: of the 108 patients with gynecological cancer who received i.v. infusions of Helixor®, 10 (9.3%) reported mild ADRs, and no serious ADRs were reported. Conclusion: Therefore, i.v. infusion of Helixor® was determined to be safe, and prospective efficacy studies are recommended.

Diuretic Drug Utilization Study

1996 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 169-176
Author(s):  
Jaime Torelló ◽  
José A Durán ◽  
María I Serrano
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Drug Reactions ◽  
Diuretic Therapy ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
World Health ◽  
Drug Reactions ◽  
Cardiac Symptoms ◽  
Medicine Service ◽  
Combined Use ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
The University

Objective: To evaluate the present use of diuretics in our institution, and determine the appropriateness of that use and the incidence of adverse reactions and interactions. Design: This retrospective study describes the indications for use of an identified drug or combination of drugs. By the time the data were collected, some patients had been discharged or had died. Setting: The study was carried out in a referral center, the University Hospital “Virgen Macarena,” Seville, Spain. Patients: All patients receiving diuretic therapy. Those undergoing hemodialysis or receiving home care were excluded from the study. Intervention: A therapeutic audit was performed using specific standards of reference. Two models were used — one for each of the most frequent indications, ascites and congestive heart failure (CHF). Main Outcome Measures: A structured protocol gathered data on (1) demographic characteristics, (2) causes of admission and pathologic antecedents, (3) diuretic treatment, (4) basic controls (24-h diuresis and daily basal weight), (5) clinical evolution, and (6) concurrent complementary studies. The protocol included a checklist of the most frequent adverse drug reactions and interactions whose degree of causality was determined by applying the modified algorithm of Karch-Lasagna, used in the World Health Organization voluntary reporting system of adverse drug reactions. Results: One hundred twenty-six patients (16% of total admissions) received diuretic therapy. Of these, 71% were analyzed; information in the medical records was incomplete for the rest (29%). Fifty-one percent of the patients were more than 60 years old. The most frequent admission diagnoses were cardiovascular (51.5%), followed by digestive (16.7%) diseases. A total of 134 cardiac symptoms was seen in 50 patients. The most notable were acute pulmonary edema (26%), ischemic cardiopathy (12%), and cardiogenic shock (8%). Most patients receiving diuretic therapy (47.3%) were admitted to the internal medicine service. The most-prescribed diuretic was furosemide (59%), followed by spironolactone (27%). The combined use of furosemide and spironolactone occurred in all but 1 of the patients with hepatic ascites (92%), whereas in those with CHF the figure for the combined use of furosemide and spironolactone fell to 38% (p = 0.001). In 63% of the patients with ascites, the spironolactone dosage was changed in the first 48 hours of treatment. There was a high percentage of deaths (21%) in the study patients. Conclusions: Therapeutic strategy often does not follow the guidelines laid down in the standards of reference on diuretic use in serious CHF and/or ascites in this institution.

Admissions to a University Hospital for Adverse Drug Reactions and Patient’s Interruption of Treatment

Drug Safety ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 30 (10) ◽  
pp. 919-990
Author(s):  
G Giachetto ◽  
A Danza ◽  
L Lucas ◽  
F Cristiani ◽  
L Cuñetti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Drug Reactions ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Drug Reactions

The Characteristics of Adverse Drug Reactions in Cancer Patients: An Analysis of Spontaneously Reported Cases

2020 ◽  
Vol 95 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-113
Author(s):  
Hae-Soo Jeon ◽  
Hee-Kyoo Kim ◽  
Gil-Soon Choi
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Clinical Features ◽  
Adverse Drug Reactions ◽  
Antineoplastic Agents ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
World Health ◽  
Drug Reactions ◽  
Iodinated Contrast ◽  
Health Organization

Background/Aims: Although the number of domestic adverse drug reactions (ADRs) reported in Korea is rapidly increasing, the analysis of ADRs in cancer patients remains limited. We sought to investigate the clinical features of ADRs in cancer patients.Methods: ADR data were collected from a spontaneous reporting system at single university hospital, between July 2010 and June 2015. ADR cases assessed to be “unlikely” or “unclassifiable” as per the criteria of the World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Center were excluded. Additional medical information was retrospectively collected from chart reviews, and clinical features of ADRs were analyzed.Results: In total, 1,455 cases were reported. Of these, 822 ADRs (52.1%) were observed in cancer patients. The mean age of cancer patients was 60.8 years (range, 17–90 years), and 45.9% were male. The most prevalent clinical features were gastrointestinal abnormalities (32.6%), such as nausea and vomiting, followed by skin (28.5%) and neurologic manifestations (26.0%). Fifty-one (6.2%) and 296 cases (36.0%) were classified as severe and moderate, respectively. The most common causative agents were parenteral nutrition (PN) supplements (40.4%), followed by antibiotics (17.8%), analgesics (16.7%), iodinated contrast media (ICM, 10.6%), and vitamins (3.9%). Antineoplastic agents were responsible for 2.9% of cases. PN supplements were commonly associated with severe reactions.Conclusion: Although it is well known that antibiotics, ICM, and analgesics induce ADRs, PN supplements, vitamins, and antineoplastic agents should also be considered as common causes of ADRs in cancer patients. Further investigation and monitoring to determine the causality associated with these agents is required.

scholarly journals Adverse drug reactions in SARS-CoV-2 hospitalised patients: a case-series with a focus on drug–drug interactions

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giada Crescioli ◽  
Valentina Brilli ◽  
Cecilia Lanzi ◽  
Andrea Burgalassi ◽  
Alessandra Ieri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Drug Reactions ◽  
Case Series ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Drug Reactions ◽  
Case Evaluation ◽  
Hospitalised Patients ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Case Series Study ◽  
Caucasian Patients ◽  
Series Study

AbstractDue to the need of early and emergency effective treatments for COVID-19, less attention may have been paid to their safety during the global emergency. In addition, characteristics of drug–drug interaction (DDI)-related adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in COVID-19 patients have not yet been studied in depth. The aim of the present case-series study is to describe clinical and pharmacological characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 hospitalised patients, focusing on ADRs, particularly those related to DDIs. We evaluated all reports of COVID-19 medication-related ADRs collected within the COVID-19 Units of Careggi University Hospital, Florence (Italy), between January 1st and 31st May 2020. Information regarding COVID-19 medications, patients’ demographic and clinical characteristics, concomitant drugs, ADRs description and outcome, were collected. Each case was evaluated for the causality assessment and to identify the presence of DDIs. During the study period, 23 Caucasian patients (56.5% males, mean age 76.1 years) experienced one or more ADRs. The majority of them were exposed to polypharmacy and 17.4% presented comorbidities. ADRs were referred to cardiovascular, psychiatric and gastrointestinal disorders. The most frequently reported preferred term was QT prolongation (mean QT interval 496.1 ms). ADRs improved or resolved completely in 60.8% of cases. For all patients, a case-by-case evaluation revealed the presence of one or more DDIs, especially those related to pharmacokinetic interactions. Despite the small number of patients, our evidence underline the clinical burden of DDIs in SARS-CoV-2 hospitalised patients and the risk of unexpected and uncommon psychiatric ADRs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document