Incidence, risk factors and risk prediction of hospital-acquired suspected adverse drug reactions: a prospective cohort of Ugandan inpatients

BMJ Open. 2017 Jan 20;7(1):e010568. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010568.

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the incidence and risk factors of hospital-acquired suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) among Ugandan inpatients. We also constructed risk scores to predict and qualitatively assess for peculiarities between low-risk and high-risk ADR patients.

Methods: Prospective cohort of consented adults admitted on medical and gynaecological wards of the 1790-bed Mulago National Referral Hospital. Hospital-acquired suspected ADRs were dichotomised as possible (possible/probable/definite) or not and probable (probable/definite) or not, using the Naranjo scale. Risk scores were generated from coefficients of ADR risk-factor logistic regression models.

Results: The incidence of possible hospital-acquired suspected ADRs was 25% (194/762, 95% CI: 22% to 29%): 44% (85/194) experienced serious possible ADRs. The risk of probable ADRs was 11% (87/762, 95% CI 9% to 14%): 46% (40/87) had serious probable ADRs. Antibacterials-only (51/194), uterotonics-only (21/194), cardiovascular drugs-only (16/194), antimalarials-only (12/194) and analgesics-only (10/194) were the most frequently implicated. Treatment with six or more conventional medicines during hospitalisation (OR=2.31, 95% CI 1.29 to 4.15) and self-reported herbal medicine use during the 4 weeks preadmission (OR=1.96, 95% CI 1.22 to 3.13) were the risk factors for probable hospital-acquired ADRs. Risk factors for possible hospital-acquired ADRs were: treatment with six or more conventional medicines (OR=2.72, 95% CI 1.79 to 4.13), herbal medicine use during the 4 weeks preadmission (OR=1.68, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.43), prior 3 months hospitalisation (OR=1.57, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.26) and being on gynaecological ward (OR=2.16, 95% CI 1.36 to 3.44). More drug classes were implicated among high-risk ADR-patients, with cardiovascular drugs being the most frequently linked to possible ADRs.

Conclusions: The risk of hospital-acquired suspected ADRs was higher with preadmission herbal medicine use and treatment with six or more conventional medicines during hospitalisation. Our risk scores should be validated in large-scale studies and tested in routine clinical care.

Keywords: CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY; EPIDEMIOLOGY; GENERAL MEDICINE (see Internal Medicine); GYNAECOLOGY.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Analgesics / adverse effects
  • Anti-Infective Agents / adverse effects
  • Cardiovascular Agents / adverse effects
  • Drug Interactions
  • Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions*
  • Female
  • Hospitalization*
  • Hospitals*
  • Humans
  • Incidence
  • Logistic Models
  • Male
  • Odds Ratio
  • Plant Extracts / administration & dosage
  • Polypharmacy
  • Prospective Studies
  • Risk Factors
  • Uganda
  • Young Adult

Substances

  • Analgesics
  • Anti-Infective Agents
  • Cardiovascular Agents
  • Plant Extracts