Background: Vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) is an allergic eye disease that especially affects young boys. Both olopatadine and bepotestine are dual acting drugs that provide rapid symptomatic relief coupled with the long-term disease-modifying benefit. The present study is conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of olopatadine eye drops and bepotastine eye drops in patients of vernal keratoconjunctivitis.Methods: A prospective, randomized, parallel-group, comparative study is conducted over a period of 4 weeks on paediatric patients with VKC. 50 patients are recruited and randomized into two treatment groups. They received the assigned drugs for 4 weeks and are called for follow up at the end of 1st week, 4th week and 12th week. At each follow-up, patients are examined and the clinical parameters are graded.Results: This study shows that both olopatadine and bepotastine are equally efficacious. Bepotastine provided quicker relief to symptoms of watering, ocular discomfort and conjunctival hyperaemia. Number of responders are also more in the bepotastine group. Absolute eosinophilic count improved with both the drugs but there is no statistically significant difference between them. Both drugs showed good safety profile. However, 24% patients reported aversion to bitter taste with bepotastine. There is no treatment related severe adverse effects in both the groups.Conclusions: Both olopatadine and bepotastine are effective in treating vernal keratoconjunctivitis. However, bepotastine performed better in reducing tearing, ocular discomfort and conjunctival hyperaemia.

Objective: To identify fixed drug combinations causing the adverse drug reactions both rational and irrational.Methods: A prospective observational study was carried out over a period of 6 mo (between June 2016 to December 2016) to evaluate adverse drug reactions related to fixed drug combinations in a tertiary care teaching hospital using suspected adverse drug reaction reporting form.Results: A total number of 64 adverse drug reactions were reported during this period. Of the total adverse drug reactions reported, 27 (42%) were due to fixed drug combinations. 6 (28.5%) were serious and 21(71.5%) were non-serious. Causality was certain in 4 (14.8%) cases and probably in remaining 23 (85.2%) cases. 19(70%) irrational fixed drug combinations were reported.Conclusion: The above results show that irrational fixed drug combinations contribute major extent to adverse drug reactions. Hence, awareness programs should be conducted for all the health care workers to improve the rationality of prescription and to decrease adverse drug reactions.

Objective: This study attempts to analyze the severe ADRs in a tertiary care centre and assess their seriousness, outcome, causality and severity. We emphasize on the need for reporting of ADRs by all healthcare professionals as it will reduce the burden of morbidity due to drugs and ensure better and more efficient healthcare. To analyse and evaluate the severe ADVERSE DRUG REACTIONs reported from various departments in a Tertiary care Teaching hospital.Methods: It is a prospective observational study that was carried out over a period of 6 mo (from July 2016 to December 2016) to assess the percentage of severe adverse drug reactions reported to the Pharmacovigilance cell of a tertiary care teaching hospital. The data collected included patient’s demographic details, presenting complaints, clinical diagnosis and details of the drug(s) prescribed. The data was analysed for causality (as per the WHO-UMC scale) and severity (as per Hartwig and Siegel scale).Results: Out of 64 ADRs reported, 17 were serious. The majority of serious ADRs were categorized as probable (82.35%), whilst 1(5.8%) was categorized as possible and 2(11.76%) as certain in nature. The criteria for the majority of serious ADRs were hospitalization (%) followed by intervention to prevent permanent impairment or damage (%).Conclusion: The highest percentage of severe cases was reported with Antitubercular therapy (23.5%) followed by analgesics (23%) and anti epileptic agents (17.6%).