A 13-Year National Monitoring Study to Assess Narcotic Prescriptions and Indications (2007–2019)

Drug Safety - Analgesics are among the most widely used drugs worldwide. This study describes the population treated with narcotic analgesics, their therapeutic indications and how the data have...     

Medicine or ecstasy? The importance of the logo

Some pharmaceutical tablets have an appearance that resembles that of ecstasy (a logo and often a name referring to it, a given shape and/or a colour). These are sometimes sold in the street as ‘ecstasy’. In order to assess the knowledge of this phenomenon, surveys were conducted among designer drug users (DDUsers), pharmacists and pharmaceutical firms. Three surveys were conducted: the first one was conducted among DDUsers by means of an anonymous questionnaire; the second one consisted of a 1‐month postal survey within a network of 155 community pharmacies in the Aquitaine region, Southwestern France and the third one consisted of a postal questionnaire sent to 71 pharmaceutical firms. Nineteen users, 77 pharmacists and 25 pharmaceutical firms participated in the surveys. All DDUsers knew the existence of what they call ecstasy ‘swindles’, but less than one quarter of the pharmacists and one third of pharmaceutical firms were aware of the potential recreational and involuntary misuse of medicines. The phenomenon of ‘swindle’ in the illicit market is not new. However, the sale of medicines because of their appearance or logo seems to be quite rare. In order to limit this diversion, prevention should be reinforced. In addition, recommendations on the appearance of medicine tablets should be set up by regulatory agencies in charge of medicine approval.     

Inhaled corticosteroids and adrenal insufficiency : prevalence and clinical presentation

OBJECTIVE: Adrenal insufficiency (AI) is a potentially life-threatening condition. It is known that high doses of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) can induce systemic adverse effects. Currently, there are no data on the prevalence of AI associated with the use of ICS. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and clinical presentation of AI (associated or not associated with exogenous Cushing's syndrome) in patients who were prescribed ICS by French physicians during the period 2000-5. METHODS: All metropolitan French paediatricians, endocrinologists, pulmonologists and intensive care physicians (n = 11 783) were mailed questionnaires requesting information regarding cases of AI associated or not associated with exogenous Cushing's syndrome between 2000 and 2005. Data collected included patient demographics, oral corticosteroid or ICS used during the year preceding the diagnosis of AI, underlying condition(s), concomitant treatment(s), presenting clinical signs and symptoms, results of laboratory investigations and outcome. The French pharmacovigilance database was screened for spontaneous reports to determine the frequency of AI associated with the use of ICS, using the capture-recapture method. RESULTS: Forty-six cases of AI were identified. Twenty-three cases presented with clinical symptoms of AI alone and 23 with exogenous Cushing's syndrome. ICS prescribed were fluticasone propionate (n = 24), budesonide (n = 12) and beclometasone dipropionate (n = 5). In 82% (n = 32) of cases for which data were available, ICS were prescribed at high doses. A potential drug interaction was found in 12 cases. Thirteen cases of AI were identified in the French pharmacovigilance database, one of which was common with the questionnaire survey. The capture-recapture method provided an estimation of 598 (95% CI 551, 648) cases of AI associated with the use of ICS for the 2000-5 period in France. CONCLUSION: The results of this study confirm the occurrence of adrenal insufficiency in patients treated with ICS. Although the prevalence of ICS-induced AI reported in this study is low, the likelihood of under-diagnosis underlines the need to consider this risk in patients when prescribing these drugs.     

Validation of a measurement scale: example of a French Adverse Drug Reactions Preventability Scale

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) have been recognised as an important cause of hospital admission. Most of these drug-related admissions were expected ADRs and, thus, partly preventable. However, as far as we know, the assessment of the preventability of ADRs was addressed in only two studies performed in France. In contrast, several other studies have been performed, mainly in the USA, and using different methods of assessing preventability. None of these methods were clearly evaluated with regard to reproducibility, validity or relevance. The purpose of this study was to initiate the validation of a French preventability scale. Here, we propose the first two phases of validation: the content validity and reliability of the scale. A working group of pharmacovigilance experts has been specifically established for this purpose. The content validity was assessed by collecting items representative of preventability. The choice and the formulation of items and a proposal of a score (global and for each item) were adopted after the consensus of the experts. A definitive version of the ADR preventability scale was used for the assessment of reliability. During the second phase, experts independently tested the new scale from observations of ADRs (49 central nervous system haemorrhages with antivitamine K). The concordance of the experts' judgements was calculated using two statistical methods (Kappa statistic and correlation coefficient). The content validity phase was performed during several workshops where experts discussed the choice and formulation of the best items. We decided to construct a scale with a small number of items, allowing a rapid evaluation of the preventability of ADRs. On the basis of a global score, four categories of preventability of ADRs ("preventable", "potentially preventable", "unclassable", "not preventable" ADRs) were proposed. The agreement of experts regarding the global score was low, with a poor correlation coefficient value (coefficient interclass = 0.491). Classification of ADRs in the four categories by the experts showed discrepancies (Kappa = 0.1136). The preventability assessment using this scale was feasible, although poor concordance between the judges has raised some questions. Several experts found use of this scale difficult in terms of a clear understanding of the items, and found that two of them were redundant. We have oversimplified some items and revision of their formulation will be necessary. Moreover, most of ADR notifications were poorly documented, resulting in a frequent choice of an "unevaluable" item. This represented an important bias in the calculation of the global score. This experience suggests the need for further studies to improve this French ADR preventability scale and validate it in differing circumstances, in order to provide a useful tool to enhance the rational use of drugs.