scholarly journals The therapeutic outcomes and adverse drug reactions study of Clozapine on Schizophrenia inpatients in the Grhasia psychiatric hospital Yogyakarta, Indonesia

2021 ◽  
pp. 287-295
Author(s):  
Woro Harjaningsih ◽  
Laila Ayunirrahmah ◽  
Nur Jannah Virsya Putri

Introduction: Clozapine is an antipsychotic agent used in schizophrenia recurrence or when other antipsychotics are not effective. Aims: This study aims to determine the therapeutic outcome and adverse drug reactions of clozapine in schizophrenia disorder among hospitalised patients. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted between January 2018 and December 2019 using inpatients’ medical records from the Grhasia Psychiatric Hospital, Yogyakarta. The therapeutic outcome was measured with the PANSS-EC scale, while adverse drug reactions of clozapine were analysed theoretically as per the literature. Results: The average decrease in the PANSS-EC score was 8.27, and the average duration to achieve this decrease was 2.5 days. The combination of typical-atypical antipsychotics could reduce the highest PANSS-EC score of 11-15 (41%). The adverse drug reactions of clozapine were tremor, weight gain, obesity, leucopenia, hyperglycemia, and hypercholesterolemia, among other effects. Conclusion: Clozapine is effective in improving positive and negative symptoms, but its use needs close monitoring.

Author(s):  
Ali Awadallah Saeed ◽  
Osman Umballi ◽  
Namareg Ahmed ◽  
Shaza Ali ◽  
Azza Alfaki

Introduction: Adverse drug reactions resulting from the use of a medicinal product and were harmful or unpleasant reaction. Pharmacovigilance is related pharmaceuticals product after marketing and associated with collection, detection, assessment, monitoring and prevention of adverse effects. The aim of study is to recognize the awareness of pharmacists regarding pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reactions reporting. Methodology: Descriptive cross-sectional study conducted to 237 pharmacists working in Khartoum’s locality pharmacies from August 2019 to March 2020 selected by simple randomization. The data were collected by face to face interview using self-administrated Questionnaire and analyzed by SPSS version 23. Results: 57.4% from the total sample size never seen adverse drug reactions reporting form, 76.4% never receive training on how to report it and only 10.5% from the pharmacists in the study report it to pharmacovigilance center. 79% from pharmacists in the study were not aware about existence of pharmacovigilance program in Sudan. 51.5 % from pharmacists have good attitude about adverse drug reactions and pharmacovigilance in Sudan while 48.5% had poor attitude. Difficulty in communicating with pharmacovigilance centre in Sudan and how to write the report were the factors discourage pharmacists from reporting of adverse drug reactions. Conclusion: Community pharmacists have insufficient knowledge about the concept of pharmacovigilance and spontaneous ADRs reporting while they had positive attitudes toward pharmacovigilance, despite their little experience with ADRs reporting, this can be strengthened by educational trainings and workshops.                   Peer Review History: Received: 4 September 2021; Revised: 9 October; Accepted: 29 October, Available online: 15 November 2021 Academic Editor:  Dr. Jennifer Audu-Peter, University of Jos, Nigeria, [email protected] UJPR follows the most transparent and toughest ‘Advanced OPEN peer review’ system. The identity of the authors and, reviewers will be known to each other. This transparent process will help to eradicate any possible malicious/purposeful interference by any person (publishing staff, reviewer, editor, author, etc) during peer review. As a result of this unique system, all reviewers will get their due recognition and respect, once their names are published in the papers. We expect that, by publishing peer review reports with published papers, will be helpful to many authors for drafting their article according to the specifications. Auhors will remove any error of their article and they will improve their article(s) according to the previous reports displayed with published article(s). The main purpose of it is ‘to improve the quality of a candidate manuscript’. Our reviewers check the ‘strength and weakness of a manuscript honestly’. There will increase in the perfection, and transparency.  Received file:                Reviewer's Comments: Average Peer review marks at initial stage: 5.5/10 Average Peer review marks at publication stage: 7.0/10 Reviewers: Dr. Neelam H. Zaidi, Fiji National University, Fiji, [email protected] Dr. U. S. Mahadeva Rao, Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Terengganu Malaysia, [email protected] Dr. Hayriye Eda Şatana Kara, Gazi University, Turkey, [email protected] Dr. Andrzej Szymański, Poznan University of Technology, Poland, [email protected] Similar Articles: AWARENESS OF PHARMACISTS TOWARDS ASPARTAME SIDE EFFECTS IN KHARTOUM CITY, SUDAN ASSESSMENT OF THE ROLE OF COMMUNITY PHARMACISTS IN MANAGEMENT OF HIV-POSITIVE INDIVIDUALS IN THE SOUTHERN REGION OF NIGERIA


Author(s):  
Sangeetha Raja ◽  
Jamuna Rani R ◽  
Kala P

ABSTRACTObjective: The aim of this study was to carry out adverse drug reactions (ADRs) monitoring in various departments of a tertiary care teaching hospital.Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on ADRs reported in the hospital from December 2012 to May 2013 after obtaining InstitutionalEthics Committee approval.Results: A total of 40 ADRs were reported, 47.50% were males and 52.50% were females. The female adult population was 45%. The majority of ADRswere due to antimicrobial agents especially beta-lactam antibiotics (42.5%) followed by NSAIDs (7.50%). A maximum number of patients (75%)were reported with dermatological manifestations. The department of medicine reported the highest number of ADRs (37.5%). As per Naranjo’sprobability scale, 62.5% reports were assessed as probable. 62.5% reports were documented as mild according to Modified Hartwig’s criteria forseverity assessment.Conclusion: This study was done to sensitize the practicing physicians on the importance of adverse drug monitoring and reporting.Keywords: Pharmacovigilance, Adverse drug reactions, Tertiary care teaching hospital, Antimicrobial agents.


Author(s):  
Ravi D. Mala ◽  
D. M. Ravichand ◽  
B. V. Patil ◽  
B. S. Payghan ◽  
Anurag Yadav

Background: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are noxious and unintended effects of a drug that occurs at doses normally used in humans. ADRs may also result in diminished quality of life, increased physician visits, hospitalizations, and even death. The objectives of this study are to analyze and assess the causality and severity of reported ADRs.Methods: A cross sectional study of ADRs reported to Pharmacovigilance cell of MNR Medical College and Hospital Sangareddy in a year. The details of the various ADRs were statistically analyzed to find out pattern of ADRs. The WHO-UMC causality category and Hartwig-Seigel Scale were used to assess causality and severity of ADRs respectively.Results: The study shows, out of 60 suspected ADRs, the majority of ADRs were adults (68.3%) and out of whom 56% were females. According to the WHO-UMC Causality categories, 43.3% of the ADRs were categorized under Probable/likely, followed by possible (35%). The Hartwig-Siegel severity assessment scale shows that the majority (90%) of suspected ADRs were of mild category.Conclusions: The pattern of ADRs reported in our study is comparable to other studies. The commonest organ system affected was gastrointestinal tract, nervous and cutaneous system. Antimicrobial agents were causing maximum ADRs and medicine and allied departments have more number of ADRs. This study provides a valuable database for ADRs due to all commonly used drugs at hospitals and also helps in creating awareness regarding safe & judicious use of drugs to prevent ADRs.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. e030515
Author(s):  
Junpei Komagamine ◽  
Masaki Kobayashi

ObjectivesFew studies have investigated the prevalence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) leading to hospitalisation in Japan. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of ADRs leading to hospitalisation and to evaluate the preventability of these ADRs in Japan.DesignA single-centre cross-sectional study using electronic medical records.SettingAcute care hospital.ParticipantsAll 1545 consecutive hospital admissions to an internal medicine ward due to acute medical illnesses from April 2017 to May 2018. The median patient age was 79 years (IQR 66–87), and the proportion of women was 47.9%.Outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of hospitalisations caused by ADRs among all hospitalisations. All suspected cases of ADRs were independently evaluated by two reviewers, and disagreements were resolved by discussion. The causality assessment for ADRs was performed by using the WHO-Uppsala Monitoring Committee criteria. The contribution of ADRs to hospitalisation and their preventability were evaluated based on the Hallas criteria.ResultsOf the 1545 hospitalisations, 153 hospitalisations (9.9%, 95% CI 8.4% to 11.4%) were caused by 200 ADRs. Cardiovascular agents (n=46, 23.0%), antithrombic agents (n=33, 16.5%), psychotropic agents (n=29, 14.5%) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (n=24, 12.0%) accounted for approximately two-thirds of all ADRs leading to hospitalisation. Of 153 hospitalisations caused by ADRs, 102 (66.7%) were judged to be preventable.ConclusionsSimilar to other countries, one in every ten hospitalisations is caused by ADRs according to data from an internal medicine ward of a Japanese hospital. Most of these hospitalisations are preventable. Some efforts to minimise hospitalisations caused by ADRs are needed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document