Structured Assessment for Prospective Identification of Safety Signals in Electronic Medical Records: Evaluation in the Health Improvement Network

Abstract

BackgroundPharmacovigilance signal detection largely relies on individual case reports, but longitudinal health data are being explored as complementary information sources. Research to date has focused on the ability of epidemiological methods to distinguish established adverse drug reactions (ADRs) from unrelated adverse events.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate a process for structured clinical and epidemiological assessment of temporally associated drugs and medical events in electronic medical records.MethodsPairs of drugs and medical events were selected for review on the basis of their temporal association according to a calibrated self-controlled cohort analysis in The Health Improvement Network. Six assessors trained in pharmacovigilance and/or epidemiology evaluated seven drugs each, with up to 20 medical events per drug. A pre-specified questionnaire considered aspects related to the nature of the temporal pattern, demographic features of the cohort, concomitant medicines, earlier signs and symptoms, and possible confounding by underlying disease. This informed a classification of drug–event pairs as known ADRs, meriting further evaluation, or dismissed.ResultsThe number of temporally associated medical events per drug ranged from 11 to 307 (median 50) for the 42 selected drugs. Out of the 509 relevant drug–event combinations subjected to the assessment, 127 (25 %) were classified as known ADRs. Ninety-one (24 %) of the remaining pairs were classified as potential signals meriting further evaluation and 291 (76 %) were dismissed. Suggestive temporal patterns and lack of clear alternative explanations were the most common reasons that drug–event pairs were classified as meriting further evaluation. Earlier signs and symptoms and confounding by the underlying disease were the most common reasons that drug–event pairs were dismissed.ConclusionsExploratory analysis of electronic medical records can detect important potential safety signals. However, effective signal detection requires that statistical signal detection be combined with clinical and epidemiological review to achieve an acceptable false positive rate.

Experiences and Lessons From Implementing Cohort Event Monitoring Programmes for Antimalarials in Four African Countries: Results of a Questionnaire-Based Survey

“…The long-term solution may be the increased use of electronic health records (EHRs) that enable signal detection in longitudinal health data [19]. In the shorter term, EHRs and other digital technologies such as mobile phone applications that facilitate electronic data capture may be developed to reduce the workload associated with CEM.…”

Electronic health records to facilitate clinical research

“…Active post-marketing safety surveillance and signal detection are important, emerging applications for EHRs, because they can provide realistic rates of events (unlike spontaneous event reports) and information on real-world use of drugs [20]. The EU-ADR project linked 8 databases in four European countries (Denmark, Italy, The Netherlands, United Kingdom) to enable analysis of select target adverse drug events [21].…”

Risk Analysis for Patient Safety in Surgical Departments: Cross-Sectional Design Usefulness

“…This protocol has managed to reduce the incidence of post-surgical complications and mortality by about 50% [49]. Other strategies of proven utility are the introduction of an electronic medical history to prevent errors in surgical programming [50][51][52]; providing the patient with an informed consent form for intervention in preoperative consultation [53]; marking of the surgical site-if possible with the collaboration of the patients themselves [54]; viewing CT scans, X-rays, or other images [55] during the intervention, to prevent errors in the anatomical area to be treated; correct positioning of the patient on the operating table to prevent secondary vascular or neurological injuries [56]; patient education when being discharged with ostomies, catheters, drains, or other medical devices, to prevent readmissions or new consultations [57], among other actions.…”