Evaluation of patient reporting of adverse drug reactions to the UK 'Yellow Card Scheme': literature review, descriptive and qualitative analyses, and questionnaire surveys

• Published in: Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) England), 2011-05, Vol.15 (20), p.1-234
• Main Authors: Avery, A J, Anderson, C, Bond, C M, Fortnum, H, Gifford, A, Hannaford, P C, Hazell, L, Krska, J, Lee, A J, McLernon, D J, Murphy, E, Shakir, S, Watson, M C
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; adverse drug reaction; Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems - instrumentation; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions - classification; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions - epidemiology; Evaluation Studies as Topic; Female; Focus Groups; Health Personnel; health-care professionals; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; patient-reporting; pharmacovigilance; Qualitative Research; Safety Management; Self Report; Surveys and Questionnaires; United Kingdom - epidemiology; yellow card scheme
• ISSN: 1366-5278; 2046-4924
• DOI: 10.3310/hta15200

The monitoring of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) through pharmacovigilance is vital to patient safety. Spontaneous reporting of ADRs is one method of pharmacovigilance, and in the UK this is undertaken through the Yellow Card Scheme (YCS). Yellow Card reports are submitted to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) by post, telephone or via the internet. The MHRA electronically records and reviews information submitted so that important safety issues can be detected. While previous studies have shown differences between patient and health-care professional (HCP) reports for the types of drugs and reactions reported, relatively little is known about the pharmacovigilance impact of patient reports. There have also been few studies on the views and experiences of patients/consumers on the reporting of suspected ADRs. To evaluate the pharmacovigilance impact of patient reporting of ADRs by analysing reports of suspected ADRs from the UK YCS and comparing reports from patients and HCPs. To elicit the views and experiences of patients and the public about patient reporting of ADRs. (1) Literature review and survey of international experiences of consumer reporting of ADRs; (2) descriptive analysis of Yellow Card reports; (3) signal generation analysis of Yellow Card reports; (4) qualitative analysis of Yellow Card reports; (5) questionnaire survey of patients reporting on Yellow Cards; (6) qualitative analysis of telephone interviews with patient reporters to the scheme; (7) qualitative analysis of focus groups and usability testing of the patient YCS; and (8) national omnibus telephone survey of public awareness of the YCS. Patients (n = 5180) and HCPs (n = 20,949) submitting Yellow Card reports from October 2005 to September 2007. Respondents to questionnaire survey (n = 1362). Participants at focus groups and usability testing sessions (n = 40). National omnibus telephone survey (n = 2028). The literature review included studies in English from across the world. All other components included populations from the UK; the omnibus survey was restricted to Great Britain. None. Characteristics of patient reports: types of drug and suspected ADR reported; seriousness of reports; and content of reports. The relative contributions of patient reports and of HCP reports to signal generation. Views and experiences of patient reporters. Views of members of the public about the YCS, including user-friendliness and usability of different ways of patie