Author(s): Anjali Anand K., Ralph Winson Pereira, Runi D. Shetty, Praneetha Jain, Supriya P. S., Shraddha Shetty

Email(s): jain.pranitha10@gmail.com

DOI: 10.52711/0974-360X.2024.00366   

Address: Anjali Anand K.1, Ralph Winson Pereira1, Runi D. Shetty1, Praneetha Jain2*, Supriya P. S.3, Shraddha Shetty4
1Pharm D Interns, Department of Pharmacy Practice, NGSM Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Nitte (Deemed to be University), Deralakatte, Mangaluru - 575018, India.
2Assistant Professor, Department of Pharmacy Practice, NGSM Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Nitte (Deemed to be University), Deralakatte, Mangaluru - 575018, India.
3Associate Professor, Department of General Medicine, Father Muller Medical College, Mangaluru-575002, India.
4Assistant Professor, Department of Community Medicine, KS Hegde Medical Academy, Nitte (Deemed to be University), Deralakatte, Mangaluru -575018, India.
*Corresponding Author

Published In:   Volume - 17,      Issue - 5,     Year - 2024


ABSTRACT:
Background: To prevent medication-related patient harm and improve healthcare safety and quality, the hospital needs to detect, report, and review adverse drug reactions (ADR) so that specific target safety interventions can be done. Triggers are clues or tools used to identify adverse events. Methodology: A prospective review of patient (n = 366) records using the Global Trigger Tool method was undertaken to detect ADRs for 6 months. The presence of ADRs was reviewed by three independent authors using 39 triggers, and the findings were validated by a physician and a clinical pharmacist. Data collected was entered in Excel and analyzed by using SPSS Version 29.0 Results: Among 366 patient records reviewed, 203 times triggers were observed; the most common trigger was antiemetics (32.02%). However, the most common trigger related to adverse effects was using the other medication module trigger (25.12%). A total of 47 ADRs were observed, of which 44 were associated with triggers, and three were reported spontaneously. The most common ADR was found to be constipation in 11 patients (23.40%), and the most common drug class associated with ADRs was observed to be antibiotics in 16 patients (34.04%). There was no association observed between the ADR and the patient-specific factors. Conclusion: The trigger tool can be a feasible method for identifying ADRs compared to the traditional ADR identification methods. To improve the quality of patient safety,trigger-tool-based identification of ADR can be used in routine settings.


Cite this article:
Anjali Anand K., Ralph Winson Pereira, Runi D. Shetty, Praneetha Jain, Supriya P. S., Shraddha Shetty. Trigger Tool-Based Detection of Adverse Drug Reactions – A Prospective Observational Study. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2024; 17(5):2339-4. doi: 10.52711/0974-360X.2024.00366

Cite(Electronic):
Anjali Anand K., Ralph Winson Pereira, Runi D. Shetty, Praneetha Jain, Supriya P. S., Shraddha Shetty. Trigger Tool-Based Detection of Adverse Drug Reactions – A Prospective Observational Study. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2024; 17(5):2339-4. doi: 10.52711/0974-360X.2024.00366   Available on: https://www.rjptonline.org/AbstractView.aspx?PID=2024-17-5-62


REFERENCES:
1.    Manohar D. Kengar, Kiran K. Patole, Akshay K. Ade, Sumesh M. Kumbhar, Chetan D. Patil, Ashutosh R. Ganjave. Introduction to Pharmacovigilance and Monitoring. Asian J. Pharm. Res. 2019; 9(2): 116-122.
2.    Badar Uddin Umar, Mainul Haque. Adverse Drug Reactions in Bangladeshi Health Care Setup: An Update. Research J. Pharm. and Tech. 2015; 8(11): 1598-1602
3.    Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Data Standards for Patient Safety, Aspden P, Corrigan JM, Wolcott J, Erickson SM, eds. Patient Safety: Achieving a New Standard for Care. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2004.
4.    Patient Safety [Internet]. Who.int. 2022 [cited 20 April 2023]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/patient-safety
5.    Avinash Khairnar, P.R. Gade. Interventional Improvement in Hospital Based Intensive Monitoring of Adverse Event. Research J. Pharm. and Tech. 2011; 4(9): 1443-1448.
6.    G Parthasarathi, Karin Nyfort-Hansen, Milap C Nahata. A Textbook of Clinical Pharmacy Practice - Essential Concepts and Skills. 9. Adverse Drug Reactions and Pharmacovigilance. University Press. 2012.
7.    Schatz NS, Weber RJ. Adverse Drug Reactions. ACCP. PSAP. 2015:8
8.    Ragul Viknesh V, Saranya P. Pharmacovigilance - An Overview in a Pharmacist Perspective. Research J. Pharm. and Tech. 2020; 13(8): 3941-3946.
9.    Nikita R. Nikam, Rohan R. Vakhariya, Dr. C. S. Magdum. Pharmacovigilance: An Overview. Asian J. Res. Pharm. Sci. 2019; 9(2): 107-111.
10.    Archana B. Chavhan, Dipali M. Bhoi. Pharmacovigillance: Drug Safety Monitoring. Asian J. Pharm.    Tech.      2019; 9(1):49-52.
11.    Introduction to Trigger Tools for Identifying Adverse Events | IHI - Institute for Healthcare Improvement [Internet]. Ihi.org. 2022 [cited 21 April 2023]. Available from: http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Tools/IntrotoTriggerToolsforIdentifyingAEs.aspx.
12.    De Wet C, Bowie P. The preliminary development and testing of a global trigger tool to detect error and patient harm in primary-care records. Postgrad Med J. 2009; 85(1002): 176-180. doi:10.1136/pgmj.2008.075788
13.    IHI Global Trigger Tool for Measuring Adverse Events | IHI - Institute for Healthcare Improvement [Internet]. Ihi.org. 2022 [cited 20 April 2023]. Available from: http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Tools/IHIGlobalTriggerToolforMeasuringAEs.aspx
14.    Griffin FA, Resar RK. IHI Global Trigger Tool for Measuring Adverse Events (Second Edition). IHI Innovation Series white paper. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Institute for Healthcare Improvement; 2009.
15.    Naranjo CA, Busto U, Sellers EM, Sandor P, Ruiz I, Roberts EA, et al. A method for estimating the probability of adverse drug reactions. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1981; 30(2): 239-45.
16.    World Health Organization (WHO)-Uppsala Monitoring Centre. The use of the WHO-UMC system for standardized case causality assessment. [Cited 20 April 2023] Available from: http://www.who-umc.org/Graphics/24734.pdf.
17.    Hartwig SC, Siegel J, Schneider PJ. Preventability and severity assessment in reporting adverse drug reactions. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1992; 49(9): 2229-32.
18.    Schumock GT, Thornton JP. Focusing on the preventability of adverse drug reactions. Hosp Pharm. 1992; 27: 538
19.    Rawlins MD, Thompson JW. Pathogenesis of adverse drug reactions. Textbook of Adverse Drug Reactions. 1st Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1977;44
20.    Priyanka Paruthi, Ganesh Pansare, Avinash Khairnar. Use of Triggers to Detect Adverse Drug Reaction Induced by Cardiovascular Drugs in Outpatient Department in Nasik City. Research J. Pharm. and Tech. 2011; 4(12).
21.    Pandya AD, Patel K, Rana D, Gupta SD, Malhotra SD, Patel P. Global Trigger Tool: Proficient Adverse Drug Reaction Autodetection Method in Critical Care Patient Units. Indian J Crit Care Med. 2020; 24(3):172-178. doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23367
22.    AS Khairnar, PM Patil, NU Patil, PR Gade. Use of Triggers to Detect Adverse Drug Reactions of Gastrointestinal Tract in Outpatient Department. Research J. Pharmacology and Pharmacodynamics. 2011; 3(5): 260-262.
23.    Menat U, Desai CK, Panchal JR, Shah AN. An evaluation of trigger tool method for adverse drug reaction monitoring at a tertiary care teaching hospital. Perspect Clin Res. 2021;12(1):33-39. doi:10.4103/picr.PICR_30_19
24.    Guzmán-Ruiz O, Ruiz-López P, Gómez-Cámara A, Ramírez-Martín M. Detección de Eventos adversos en pacientes adultos hospitalizedos mediante El Método Global Triggertool. Revista de Calidad Asistencial. 2015; 30(4): 166–74. doi:10.1016/j.cali.2015.03.003
25.    Raj Purnima, Temburnikar Pankaj, Rathore M, Verma Vijay, Pandey SN. Antibiotics Induced Adverse Drug Reaction Monitoring in a Teaching Hospital in Chhattisgarh. Research J. Pharmacology and Pharmacodynamics; 2012; 4(1): 13-16.
26.    Härkänen M, Kervinen M, Ahonen J, Voutilainen A, Turunen H, Vehviläinen-Julkunen K. Patient-specific risk factors of adverse drug events in adult inpatients - evidence detected using the Global Trigger Tool method. J Clin Nurs. 2015; 24(3-4): 582-591. doi:10.1111/jocn.12714
27.    De Almeida SM, Romualdo A, de Abreu Ferraresi A, Zelezoglo GR, Marra AR, Edmond MB. Use of a trigger tool to detect adverse drug reactions in an emergency Department. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. 2017; 18(1): 71. doi:10.1186/s40360-017-0177-y
28.    Karpov A, Parcero C, Mok CPY, Panditha C, Yu E, Dempster L, et al. Performance of trigger tools in identifying adverse drug events in emergency department patients: A validation study. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 2016; 82(4): 1048–57. doi:10.1111/bcp.13032
29.    Valkonen V, Haatainen K, Saano S, Tiihonen M. Evaluation of Global trigger tool as a medication safety tool for adverse drug event detection-a cross-sectional study in a tertiary hospital. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2023; 79(5): 617-625. Doi:10.1007/s00228-023-03469-5
30.    Sahilu T, Getachew M, Melaku T, Sheleme T. Adverse drug events and contributing factors among hospitalized adult patients at Jimma Medical Center, southwest ethiopia: A prospective observational study. Current Therapeutic Research. 2020; 93:100611. doi:10.1016/j.curtheres.2020.100611.

Recomonded Articles:

Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology (RJPT) is an international, peer-reviewed, multidisciplinary journal.... Read more >>>

RNI: CHHENG00387/33/1/2008-TC                     
DOI: 10.5958/0974-360X 

1.3
2021CiteScore
 
56th percentile
Powered by  Scopus


SCImago Journal & Country Rank


Recent Articles




Tags


Not Available