Cargando…
Global Trigger Tool: Proficient Adverse Drug Reaction Autodetection Method in Critical Care Patient Units
BACKGROUND: Emergency department (ED) being the most crucial part of hospital, where adverse drug reactions (ADRs) often go undetected. Trigger tools are proficient ADR detection methods, which have only been applied for retrospective surveillance. We did a prospective analysis to further refine the...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7225762/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32435095 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23367 |
_version_ | 1783534135122329600 |
---|---|
author | Pandya, Amee D Patel, Kalan Rana, Devang Gupta, Sapna D Malhotra, Supriya D Patel, Pankaj |
author_facet | Pandya, Amee D Patel, Kalan Rana, Devang Gupta, Sapna D Malhotra, Supriya D Patel, Pankaj |
author_sort | Pandya, Amee D |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Emergency department (ED) being the most crucial part of hospital, where adverse drug reactions (ADRs) often go undetected. Trigger tools are proficient ADR detection methods, which have only been applied for retrospective surveillance. We did a prospective analysis to further refine the trigger tool application in healthcare settings. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of ADRs and prospectively evaluate the importance of using trigger tools for their detection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study was conducted in the ED for the presence of triggers in patient records to monitor and report ADRs by applying the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) trigger tool methodology. RESULTS: Four hundred sixty-three medical records were analyzed randomly using 51 trigger tools, where triggers were found in 181 (39.09%) and ADRs in 62 (13.39%) patients. The prevalence of ADR was 13.39%. According to the World Health Organization (WHO)-Uppsala Monitoring Centre (UMC) causality scale, 47 (75.8%) were classified as probable and 15 (24.2%) as possible, wherein 39 (62.9%) were predictable and 8 (12.9%) were definitely preventable. Most common triggers were abrupt medication stoppage (34.98%), antiemetic use (25.91%), and time in ED >6 hours (17.49%). The positive predictive values (PPVs) of triggers such as international normalized ratio (INR) > 4 (p = 0.0384), vitamin K administration (p = 0.002), steroid use (p = 0.0001), abrupt medication stoppage (p = 0.0077), transfusion of blood or blood products (p = 0.004), and rash (p = 0.0042) showed statistically significant results, which make the event detection process more structured when these triggers are positive. Presence of five or more triggers has statistically significant chances of developing an ADR (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Trigger tool could be a viable method to identify ADRs when compared to the traditional ADR identification methods, but there is insufficient data on IHI tool and its use to identify ADRs in the general outpatient setting. Healthcare providers may benefit from better trigger tools to help them detect ADRs. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Pandya AD, Patel K, Rana D, Gupta SD, Malhotra SD, Patel P. Global Trigger Tool: Proficient Adverse Drug Reaction Autodetection Method in Critical Care Patient Units. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(3):172–178. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7225762 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72257622020-05-20 Global Trigger Tool: Proficient Adverse Drug Reaction Autodetection Method in Critical Care Patient Units Pandya, Amee D Patel, Kalan Rana, Devang Gupta, Sapna D Malhotra, Supriya D Patel, Pankaj Indian J Crit Care Med Research Article BACKGROUND: Emergency department (ED) being the most crucial part of hospital, where adverse drug reactions (ADRs) often go undetected. Trigger tools are proficient ADR detection methods, which have only been applied for retrospective surveillance. We did a prospective analysis to further refine the trigger tool application in healthcare settings. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of ADRs and prospectively evaluate the importance of using trigger tools for their detection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study was conducted in the ED for the presence of triggers in patient records to monitor and report ADRs by applying the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) trigger tool methodology. RESULTS: Four hundred sixty-three medical records were analyzed randomly using 51 trigger tools, where triggers were found in 181 (39.09%) and ADRs in 62 (13.39%) patients. The prevalence of ADR was 13.39%. According to the World Health Organization (WHO)-Uppsala Monitoring Centre (UMC) causality scale, 47 (75.8%) were classified as probable and 15 (24.2%) as possible, wherein 39 (62.9%) were predictable and 8 (12.9%) were definitely preventable. Most common triggers were abrupt medication stoppage (34.98%), antiemetic use (25.91%), and time in ED >6 hours (17.49%). The positive predictive values (PPVs) of triggers such as international normalized ratio (INR) > 4 (p = 0.0384), vitamin K administration (p = 0.002), steroid use (p = 0.0001), abrupt medication stoppage (p = 0.0077), transfusion of blood or blood products (p = 0.004), and rash (p = 0.0042) showed statistically significant results, which make the event detection process more structured when these triggers are positive. Presence of five or more triggers has statistically significant chances of developing an ADR (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Trigger tool could be a viable method to identify ADRs when compared to the traditional ADR identification methods, but there is insufficient data on IHI tool and its use to identify ADRs in the general outpatient setting. Healthcare providers may benefit from better trigger tools to help them detect ADRs. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Pandya AD, Patel K, Rana D, Gupta SD, Malhotra SD, Patel P. Global Trigger Tool: Proficient Adverse Drug Reaction Autodetection Method in Critical Care Patient Units. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(3):172–178. Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2020-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7225762/ /pubmed/32435095 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23367 Text en Copyright © 2020; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd. © The Author(s). 2020 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and non-commercial reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Pandya, Amee D Patel, Kalan Rana, Devang Gupta, Sapna D Malhotra, Supriya D Patel, Pankaj Global Trigger Tool: Proficient Adverse Drug Reaction Autodetection Method in Critical Care Patient Units |
title | Global Trigger Tool: Proficient Adverse Drug Reaction Autodetection Method in Critical Care Patient Units |
title_full | Global Trigger Tool: Proficient Adverse Drug Reaction Autodetection Method in Critical Care Patient Units |
title_fullStr | Global Trigger Tool: Proficient Adverse Drug Reaction Autodetection Method in Critical Care Patient Units |
title_full_unstemmed | Global Trigger Tool: Proficient Adverse Drug Reaction Autodetection Method in Critical Care Patient Units |
title_short | Global Trigger Tool: Proficient Adverse Drug Reaction Autodetection Method in Critical Care Patient Units |
title_sort | global trigger tool: proficient adverse drug reaction autodetection method in critical care patient units |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7225762/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32435095 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23367 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pandyaameed globaltriggertoolproficientadversedrugreactionautodetectionmethodincriticalcarepatientunits AT patelkalan globaltriggertoolproficientadversedrugreactionautodetectionmethodincriticalcarepatientunits AT ranadevang globaltriggertoolproficientadversedrugreactionautodetectionmethodincriticalcarepatientunits AT guptasapnad globaltriggertoolproficientadversedrugreactionautodetectionmethodincriticalcarepatientunits AT malhotrasupriyad globaltriggertoolproficientadversedrugreactionautodetectionmethodincriticalcarepatientunits AT patelpankaj globaltriggertoolproficientadversedrugreactionautodetectionmethodincriticalcarepatientunits |