Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  Users Online: 904 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 7  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 223-227

A qualitative and quantitative comparison of adverse drug reaction data in different drug information sources


1 Department of Pharmacology, Government Medical College, Amritsar, Punjab, India
2 Department of Medicine, Guru Nanak Dev Hospital, Government Medical College, Amritsar, Punjab, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Navyug Raj Singh
Department of Pharmacology, Government Medical College, Amritsar - 143 001, Punjab
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijabmr.IJABMR_18_17

Rights and Permissions

Background: For safe use of medicines, awareness regarding the existing knowledge of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is essential to prevent, identify, and manage them. Aim: The present study is planned to assess variation in documented ADRs of antihypertensive drugs in various sources of drug information. Material and Methods: A cross-sectional, observational study was undertaken to analyze the different sources of ADRs-related information. Textbooks, National Formulary India (NFI), Drug Today (DT), and Current Index of Medical Specialties (CIMS) were analyzed for ADRs pertaining to nine antihypertensive groups comprising a total of 44 drugs. ADRs were categorized according to body systems, tabulated, and compared. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of ADRs and serious ADRs were done. Results and Discussion: Textbooks mostly provided ADRs of drug groups as a whole and not of individual drugs. None of the analyzed sources mentioned all antihypertensive drugs. DT contained information for the maximum number of drugs studied (81.8%) and NFI gave information for 29.7% drugs only. There was a wide variability among various resources while listing ADRs. NFI listed the maximum number of total ADRs, and least ADR information was provided by DT. NFI mentioned the maximum number of serious ADRs (47) for prototype drugs followed by CIMS (36) and DT (8). The quality of data was better in NFI, but none of the resources studied were found to be complete. Conclusion: No source of information was complete in providing wholesome information of ADRs studied, and there was a wide variability in describing them.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2224    
    Printed31    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded248    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal