Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Drug Safety
Published in: Drug Safety 5/2006

01-05-2006 | Review Article

Under-Reporting of Adverse Drug Reactions

A Systematic Review

Authors: Lorna Hazell, Saad A.W. Shakir

Published in: Drug Safety | Issue 5/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

The purpose of this review was to estimate the extent of under-reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to spontaneous reporting systems and to investigate whether there are differences between different types of ADRs. A systematic literature search was carried out to identify studies providing a numerical estimate of under-reporting. Studies were included regardless of the methodology used or the setting, e.g. hospital versus general practice. Estimates of under-reporting were either extracted directly from the published study or calculated from the study data. These were expressed as the percentage of ADRs detected from intensive data collection that were not reported to the relevant local, regional or national spontaneous reporting systems. The median under-reporting rate was calculated across all studies and within subcategories of studies using different methods or settings.
In total, 37 studies using a wide variety of surveillance methods were identified from 12 countries. These generated 43 numerical estimates of under-reporting. The median under-reporting rate across the 37 studies was 94% (interquartile range 82–98%). There was no significant difference in the median under-reporting rates calculated for general practice and hospital-based studies. Five of the ten general practice studies provided evidence of a higher median under-reporting rate for all ADRs compared with more serious or severe ADRs (95% and 80%, respectively). In comparison, for five of the eight hospital-based studies the median under-reporting rate for more serious or severe ADRs remained high (95%). The median under-reporting rate was lower for 19 studies investigating specific serious/severe ADR-drug combinations but was still high at 85%.
This systematic review provides evidence of significant and widespread under-reporting of ADRs to spontaneous reporting systems including serious or severe ADRs. Further work is required to assess the impact of under-reporting on public health decisions and the effects of initiatives to improve reporting such as internet reporting, pharmacist/nurse reporting and direct patient reporting as well as improved education and training of healthcare professionals.
Literature
1.
Edwards I, Olsson S. WHO Programme -Global Monitoring. In: Mann RD, Andrews E, editors. Pharmacovigilance. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2002: 169–82
2.
Waller PC, Bahri P. Regulatory pharmacovigilance in the EU. In: Mann RD, Andrews E, editors. Pharmacovigilance. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2002: 183–94CrossRef
3.
Griffin JP. Survey of spontaneous adverse drug reaction reporting schemes in fifteen different countries. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1986; 22: 83S–100SPubMedCrossRef
4.
Kennedy D, Goldman S, Lillie R. Spontaneous reporting in the United States. In: Strom BL, editor. Pharmacoepidemiology. 3rd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2000: 151–74
5.
Strom BL. Study designs available for pharmacoepidemiology studies. In: Strom BL, editor. Pharmacoepidemiology. 3rd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2000: 17–29CrossRef
6.
Layton D, Key C, Shakir SAW, et al. Prolongation of the QT interval and cardiac arrhythmias associated with cisapride: limitations of the pharmacoepidemiological studies conducted and proposals for the future. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003; 12%(1): 31–40CrossRef
7.
Wiholm B-E, Olsson S, Moore N, Waller P. Spontaneous reporting systems outside the US. In: Strom BL, editor. Pharmacoepidemiology. 3rd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2000: 175–92CrossRef
8.
Fourrier A, Pere JC. Measurement of frequency in pharmacovigilance. In: Arme P, editor. Methodological approaches in pharmacoepidemiology. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1993: 21–5
9.
Begaud B, Pere JC, Miremont G. Estimation of the denominator in spontaneous reporting. In: Arme P, editor. Methodological approaches in pharmacoepidemiology. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1993: 51–70
10.
Haramburu F. Estimation of underreporting. In: Arme P, editor. Methodological approaches in pharmacoepidemiology. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1993: 39–50
11.
Begaud B, Moride Y, Tubert-Bitter P, et al. False-positives in spontaneous reporting: should we worry about them? Br J Clin Pharmacol 1994; 38: 401–4PubMedCrossRef
12.
Mann RD, Andrews E, editors. Pharmacovigilance. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2002
13.
Strom BL, editor. Pharmacoepidemiology, 3rd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2000
14.
Arme P, editor. Methodological approaches in pharmacoepidemiology. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1993
15.
Talbot J, Waller P, editors. Stephens’ detection of new adverse drug reactions. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2004
16.
Council for International Organizations for Medical Sciences (CIOMS) Working Group III. Guidelines for preparing core clinical-safety information on drugs. Geneva: CIOMS, 1995
17.
Heeley E, Riley J, Layton D, et al. Prescription-event monitoring and reporting of adverse drug reactions. Lancet 2001; 358: 1872–3PubMedCrossRef
18.
Lewis MA, Kuhl-Habich D, von Rosen J. Drug use and adverse event monitoring in German children. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 2001; 39: 507–12PubMed
19.
Lacoste-Roussillon C, Pouyanne P, Haramburu F, et al. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in general practice: a prospective study. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2001; 69: 458–62PubMedCrossRef
20.
Alvarez RA, Carvajal A, Begaud B, et al. Under-reporting of adverse drug reactions: estimate based on a spontaneous reporting scheme and a sentinel system. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1998; 54: 483–8CrossRef
21.
Martin RM, Kapoor KV, Wilton LV, et al. Underreporting of suspected adverse drug reactions to newly marketed (“black triangle”) drugs in general practice: observational study. BMJ 1998; 317: 119–20PubMedCrossRef
22.
Moride Y, Haramburu F, Requejo AA, et al. Under-reporting of adverse drug reactions in general practice. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1997; 43: 177–81PubMedCrossRef
23.
Montastruc P, Damase MC, Lapeyre MM, et al. A prospective intensive study of adverse drug reactions in urban general practice. Clin Drug Invest 1995; 10: 117–22CrossRef
24.
Fletcher AP. Spontaneous adverse drug reaction reporting vs event monitoring: a comparison. J R Soc Med 1991; 84: 341–4PubMed
25.
Lumley CE, Walker SR, Hall GC, et al. The under-reporting of adverse reactions seen in general practice. Pharm Med 1986; 1: 205–12
26.
Backstrom M, Mjorndal T, Dahlqvist R. Under-reporting of serious adverse drug reactions in Sweden. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2004; 13(7): 483–7PubMedCrossRef
27.
Pouyanne P, Haramburu F, Imbs JL, et al. Admissions to hospital caused by adverse drug reactions: a cross-sectional incidence study: French pharmacovigilance centres. BMJ 2000; 320: 1036PubMedCrossRef
28.
Imbs J, Pouyanne P, Haramburu F, et al. Adverse drug reactions: prevalence in French public hospitals. Therapie 1999; 52: 21–7
29.
Smith CC, Bennett PM, Pearce HM, et al. Adverse drug reactions in a hospital general medical unit meriting notification to the Committee on Safety of Medicines. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1996; 42: 423–9PubMedCrossRef
30.
Maistrello I, Morgutti M, Maltempi M, et al. Adverse drug reactions in hospitalised patients: an operational procedure to improve reporting and investigate under reporting. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 1994; 4: 101–6CrossRef
31.
Chan T, Critchley J. Reporting of adverse drug reactions in relation to general medical admissions to a teaching hospital in Hong Kong. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 1994; 3: 85–9CrossRef
32.
Hallas J, Gram LF, Grodum E, et al. Drug related admissions to medical wards: a population based survey. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1992; 33: 61–8PubMedCrossRef
33.
Classen D, Pestotnik S, Evans RS, et al. Computerised surveillance of adverse drug reactions in hospital practice. JAMA 1991; 266: 2847–51PubMedCrossRef
34.
Dugue A, Bagheri H, Lapeyre-Mestre M, et al. Detection and incidence of muscular adverse drug reactions: a prospective analysis from laboratory to signals. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2004; 60: 285–92PubMedCrossRef
35.
Mittman N, Knowles S, Gomez M, et al. Evaluation of the extent of under-reporting of serious adverse drug reactions: the case of toxic epidermal necrolysis. Drug Saf 2004; 27: 477–87CrossRef
36.
La Grenade L, Graham DJ, Nourjah P. Underreporting of hemorrhagic stroke associated with phenylpropanolamine. JAMA 2001; 286: 3081PubMedCrossRef
37.
Bagheri H, Michel F, Lapeyre-Mestre M, et al. Detection and incidence of drug-induced liver injuries in hospital: a prospective analysis from laboratory signals. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2000; 50: 479–84PubMedCrossRef
38.
Skjeldestad FE, Amundsen T, Hoibraaten E. Reporting of adverse drug reactions to the Norwegian Drug Control Agency [in Norwegian]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 2000; 120: 336–8PubMed
39.
Pumphrey RS, Davis S. Under-reporting of antibiotic anaphylaxis may put patients at risk. Lancet 1999; 353: 1157–8PubMedCrossRef
40.
Kimmel SE, Sekeres MA, Berlin JA, et al. Adverse events after protamine administration in patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass: risks and predictors of under-reporting. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 1–10PubMedCrossRef
41.
Samuelsson E, Hagg S, Backstrom M, et al. Thrombosis caused by oral contraceptives: underreporting to the adverse effects registry [in Swedish]. Lakartidningen 1996; 93: 3117–4PubMed
42.
Prevots DR, Sutter RW, Strebel PM, et al. Completeness of reporting for paralytic poliomyelitis, United States, 1980 through 1991: implications for estimating the risk of vaccineassociated disease. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1994; 148: 479–85PubMedCrossRef
43.
Arneborn P, Palmbled J. Drug-induced neutropenia a survey for Stockholm 1973-1978. Acta Med Scand 1982; 212: 289–92PubMedCrossRef
44.
Bottiger M, Romanus V, de Verdier C, et al. Osteitis and other complications caused by generalised BCGitis: experience in Sweden. Acta Paediatr Scand 1982; 71: 471–8PubMedCrossRef
45.
Inman W-HW. Study of fatal bone marrow depression with special reference to phenylbutazone and oxyphenbutazone. BMJ 1977; 1: 1500–5PubMedCrossRef
46.
47.
Inman W-HW, Vessey MP. Investigation of deaths from pulmonary, coronary and cerebral thrombosis and embolism in women of childbearing age. BMJ 1968; 2: 193–9PubMedCrossRef
48.
in’T Veld BA, van der Linden PD, Feenstra J, et al. The function of a reporting system for suspected adverse drug reactions as risk indicator for Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis. Tijdschr Geneeskd 2000; 56: 1258–63CrossRef
49.
Farrington P, Pugh S, Colville A, et al. A new method for active surveillance of adverse events from diphtheria/tetanus/pertussis and measles/mumps/rubella vaccines. Lancet 1995; 345: 567–9PubMedCrossRef
50.
Begaud B, Chaslerie A, Haramburu F. Organization and results of drug vigilance in France [in French]. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique 1994; 42: 416–23PubMed
51.
Torello IJ, Castillo F, Lainez MM, et al. Adverse reactions to drugs reported by the primary care physicians of Andalusia: analysis of underreporting. Aten Primaria 1994; 13: 307–11
52.
Rawlins MD. Spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions: the data. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1988; 26: 1–5PubMedCrossRef
53.
Inman W-HW, Adelstein AM. Rise and fall of asthma mortality in England and Wales in relation to pressurized aerosols. Lancet 1969; II: 279–85CrossRef
54.
Belton KJ. Attitude survey of adverse drug-reaction reporting by health care professionals across the European Union. The European Pharmacovigilance Research Group. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1997; 52: 423–7PubMedCrossRef
55.
Eland IA, Belton KJ, van Grootheest AC, et al. Attitudinal survey of voluntary reporting of adverse drug reactions. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1999; 48: 623–7PubMedCrossRef
56.
Bateman DN, Sanders GLS, Rawlins MD. Attitudes to adverse drug reaction reporting in the Northern Region. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1992; 34: 421–6PubMedCrossRef
57.
Pierfitte C, Begaud B, Lagnaoui R, et al. Is reporting rate a good predictor of risks associated with drugs? Br J Clin Pharmacol 1999; 47: 329–31PubMedCrossRef
58.
Evans SJW, Waller PC, Davis S. Use of proportional reporting ratios (PRRs) for signal generation from spontaneous adverse drug reaction reports. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2001; 10: 483–6PubMedCrossRef
59.
Begaud B, Tubert P, Haramburu F, et al. Comparing toxicity of drugs: use and misuse of spontaneous reporting. Post Marketing Surveillance 1991; 5(1): 69–76
60.
Tubert-Bitter P, Begaud B, Moride Y, et al. Comparing the toxicity of two drugs in the framework of spontaneous reporting: a confidence interval approach. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49(1): 121–3PubMedCrossRef
61.
Van der Heijden PGM, Van Puijenbrock EP, Van Buuren S, et al. On the assessment of adverse drug reactions from spontaneous reporting systems: the influence of under-reporting on odds ratios. Stat Med 2002; 21: 2027–44PubMedCrossRef
62.
Rogers AS, Israel E, Smith CR, et al. Physician knowledge, attitudes, and behavior related to reporting adverse drug events. Arch Intern Med 1988; 148: 1596–600PubMedCrossRef
63.
Scott H, Rosenbaum S, Waters W, et al. Rhode Island physicians’ recognition and reporting of adverse drug reactions. R I Med J 1987; 70: 311–6PubMed
64.
Hasford J, Goettler M, Munter KH, et al. Physicians’ knowledge and attitudes regarding the spontaneous reporting system for adverse drug reactions. J Clin Epidemiol 2002; 55: 945–50PubMedCrossRef
65.
Williams D, Feely J. Underreporting of adverse drug reactions: attitudes of Irish doctors. Ir J Med Sci 1999; 168: 257–61PubMedCrossRef
66.
Backstrom M, Mjorndal T, Dahlqvist R, et al. Attitudes to reporting adverse drug reactions in northern Sweden. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2000; 56: 729–32PubMedCrossRef
67.
Herdeiro MT, Figueiras A, Polonia J, et al. Physicians’ attitudes and adverse drug reaction reporting: a case-control study in Portugal. Drug Saf 2005; 28(9): 825–33.PubMedCrossRef
68.
MCA launches web version of yellow card scheme. Pharmaceutical J 2002; 269: 631
69.
Green CF, Mottram DR, Rowe PH, et al. Adverse drug reaction monitoring by United Kingdom hospital pharmacy departments: impact of the introduction of ‘yellow card’ reporting for pharmacists. Int J Pharm Pract 1999; 7: 238–46CrossRef
70.
Backstrom M, Mjorndal T, Dahlqvist R. Spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions by nurses. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2002; 11: 647–50PubMedCrossRef
71.
Cox A, Marriott J, Wilson K, et al. Adverse drug reaction teaching in UK undergraduate medical and pharmacy programmes. J Clin Pharm Ther 2004; 29: 31–5PubMedCrossRef
72.
Centre for Pharmacy Postgraduate Education (CPPE). Adverse drug reactions (open learning pack) [online]. Available from URL: http://​www.​cppe.​man.​ac.​uk/​Bookings/​opendetails.​asp?​.​topicID=​ADR%2DD%2D02 [Accessed 2004 Aug 18]
73.
74.
Clarke A, Deeks J, Shakir S. An assessment of the publicly disseminated evidence of safety used in decisions to withdraw medicinal products from the UK and US markets. Drug Saf 2006; 29: 175–81PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Under-Reporting of Adverse Drug Reactions
A Systematic Review
Authors
Lorna Hazell
Saad A.W. Shakir
Publication date
01-05-2006
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Drug Safety / Issue 5/2006
Print ISSN: 0114-5916
Electronic ISSN: 1179-1942
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/00002018-200629050-00003

Other articles of this Issue 5/2006

Drug Safety 5/2006 Go to the issue

Review Article

Overcoming ‘Ageism’ Bias in the Treatment of Hypercholesterolaemia

Review Article

Effects Of Maternally Administered Drugs On The Fetal And Neonatal Kidney

Leading Article

Data Mining in the US using the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System

Editorial

Ecopharmacology: A New Topic of Importance in Pharmacovigilance

Original Research Article

Adverse Reactions Induced by NSAIDs and Antibacterials