No abstract

mostly from mothers of young children. Most articles included data from forums (13;46%), Twitter (5;18%) and Facebook (6;21%). 17 (61%) reported information about vaccines, 3 (11%) asthma medications and 8 (28%) other medicines.8 articles (28%) reported an ADR including tremor, auto-injector wounds and vaccine ADR. Only in one article the severity was reported. EO were reported in 25 (89%) studies and 10 (36%) articles mentioned a DRP. Studies reported lack of adherence (4;14%), difficulties (3;11%) or doubts (2;7%) about drug administration of asthma inhalers (2;7%), epinephrine auto-injector (1;4%), antibiotics (1;4%), oral drugs (1;4%), ophthalmic drugs (1;4%) and topical drugs (1;4%). Conclusion and RelevanceArticles evaluating pharmacological drugs in paediatrics focused mostly on EO and scarce data about ADR and DRP were mentioned in SM. Consequently, more studies are required to take advantage from SM as a potential tool in paediatric pharmacovigilance.

No abstract

cohort (p=0.273). Patients were classified into three risk categories (high, medium and low) and had the following rates of risk: 11.1% (0-6 points), 20.0% (8-13 points) and 39.5% (>13 points). Findings were similar in the validation cohort. The optimal cutoff point in the model was 9, having a sensitive of 67.09%, a specificity of 69.06%, a positive predictive value of 36.78%, and a negative predictive value of 87.61%. Conclusion and relevance This score could be used by clinicians from the ED to identify those patients at high risk of 30 day revisits, and could be useful to design specific interventions at discharge in this group of patients.

ALT), gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and total bilirubin (TB)), dose, diagnosis, age and sex were registered.Microsoft Excel was used for the statistics calculation. Results 68 determinations in 38 patients (73.75% men; aged 64.84 ±11.29 years).Diagnosis: probable disease 21 (55.28%), possibility 12 (31.57%), prophylaxis 5 (13.15%).6 (15.8%) patients needed a change in treatment. 5 (83.33%) had the dose changed in order to maintain plasma levels between 1 and 5.5 mg/mL. In 1 patient (16.66%) voriconazole was substituted.28 (73.7%) started treatment with the dose of 200 mg/12 hours, whereas the rest (26.3%) has a higher dose. 60% of dose changes were in patients taking 200 mg/12 hours.A positive correlation existed between plasma levels of voriconazole and liver enzymes as well as with cholestasis markers (AST: r 2 =0.1817; ALT: r 2 =0.1118; GGT: r 2 =0.2528; PA: r 2 =0.2444 and TB: r 2 =0.4637).The Chi-square statistic was significant at p<0.05 for plasmatic levels over 3 mg/mL and AST/ALT over physiological range (35 U/L).The relative risk of presenting ALT over the physiological range is 3.12 and for AST 2.31 in patients with plasmatic levels of voriconazole >3 mg/mL respects the ones whose plasmatic levels were <3 mg/mL. Conclusion and relevanceVoriconazole TDM is a tool that can help to avoid treatment failure and adverse events. Its relationship with liver toxicity, which shows our data, TDM would help to prevent these side effects.