Automatic tool for the reconciliation of serious adverse events for pharmacovigilance: design and implementation of Reconciliaid.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety Pub Date : 2025-01-18 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20420986241299567
Sara Contu, Renaud Schiappa, Yann Chateau, Emmanuel Chamorey
{"title":"Automatic tool for the reconciliation of serious adverse events for pharmacovigilance: design and implementation of Reconciliaid.","authors":"Sara Contu, Renaud Schiappa, Yann Chateau, Emmanuel Chamorey","doi":"10.1177/20420986241299567","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Reporting serious adverse events (SAEs) is crucial to reduce or avoid toxicities that can lead to major consequences for patient's health due to treatments tested in clinical trials. Its exhaustiveness is often inadequate, and we observe discrepancies between data published by pharmacovigilance organizations and clinical databases.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>While the process of reconciliation aims at reducing these differences, it remains a very time-consuming and imprecise task. We propose a tool to automate this process.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>We have developed and tested Reconciliaid, an application that compares the SAEs of the databases of clinical trials collected according to a standard inspired by the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium, and of pharmacovigilance collected according to the international standards ICH-E2B (R3). It generates a reconciliation file that indicates precisely what information does not coincide in the two databases to facilitate the identification of inconsistencies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Reconciliaid was tested to create 13 reconciliation files, containing 290 SAEs. We inspected these files to determine their ability in identifying the inconsistencies and compared the manual and semi-automated reconciliation time. Four users answered the System Usability Scale (SUS) to measure its usability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The application identified all variables of interest in all reconciliations. Different formats and libraries were automatically harmonized, allowing a perfect identification of inconsistencies for all variables. The matching of the same SAE in the two databases was correct in 97.2% of the reconciliations. Reconciliaid is six times faster than the manual approach for senior data managers (range = 3-24 times). A novice data manager performed three reconciliations 4.8 faster with the help of Reconciliaid than manually (29 min vs 134 min) and with fewer mistakes. Mean SUS score was 92.5.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Reconciliaid has a high level of usability, can increase the quality of reconciliation, and reduces considerably the reconciliation time, allowing to increase the frequency of reconciliation processes and to focus resources on patient safety and medical assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":23012,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety","volume":"16 ","pages":"20420986241299567"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11742157/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20420986241299567","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Reporting serious adverse events (SAEs) is crucial to reduce or avoid toxicities that can lead to major consequences for patient's health due to treatments tested in clinical trials. Its exhaustiveness is often inadequate, and we observe discrepancies between data published by pharmacovigilance organizations and clinical databases.

Objectives: While the process of reconciliation aims at reducing these differences, it remains a very time-consuming and imprecise task. We propose a tool to automate this process.

Design: We have developed and tested Reconciliaid, an application that compares the SAEs of the databases of clinical trials collected according to a standard inspired by the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium, and of pharmacovigilance collected according to the international standards ICH-E2B (R3). It generates a reconciliation file that indicates precisely what information does not coincide in the two databases to facilitate the identification of inconsistencies.

Methods: Reconciliaid was tested to create 13 reconciliation files, containing 290 SAEs. We inspected these files to determine their ability in identifying the inconsistencies and compared the manual and semi-automated reconciliation time. Four users answered the System Usability Scale (SUS) to measure its usability.

Results: The application identified all variables of interest in all reconciliations. Different formats and libraries were automatically harmonized, allowing a perfect identification of inconsistencies for all variables. The matching of the same SAE in the two databases was correct in 97.2% of the reconciliations. Reconciliaid is six times faster than the manual approach for senior data managers (range = 3-24 times). A novice data manager performed three reconciliations 4.8 faster with the help of Reconciliaid than manually (29 min vs 134 min) and with fewer mistakes. Mean SUS score was 92.5.

Conclusion: Reconciliaid has a high level of usability, can increase the quality of reconciliation, and reduces considerably the reconciliation time, allowing to increase the frequency of reconciliation processes and to focus resources on patient safety and medical assessment.

用于药物警戒的严重不良事件自动调节工具:Reconciliaid的设计和实现。
背景:报告严重不良事件(sae)对于减少或避免由于临床试验中测试的治疗而可能导致对患者健康产生重大后果的毒性至关重要。它的详尽性往往是不够的,我们观察到药物警戒组织和临床数据库发布的数据之间存在差异。目标:虽然和解进程旨在减少这些分歧,但它仍然是一项非常耗时和不精确的任务。我们提出了一个工具来自动化这个过程。设计:我们开发并测试了Reconciliaid,这是一款应用程序,可以比较根据临床数据交换标准联盟启发的标准收集的临床试验数据库的sae,以及根据国际标准ICH-E2B (R3)收集的药物警戒数据库的sae。它生成一个对账文件,该文件精确地指出两个数据库中哪些信息不一致,以方便识别不一致。方法:对Reconciliaid进行测试,创建13个对账文件,包含290个sae。我们检查了这些文件,以确定它们识别不一致的能力,并比较了手动和半自动调节时间。四名用户回答了系统可用性量表(SUS)来衡量其可用性。结果:应用程序识别了所有和解中感兴趣的所有变量。不同的格式和库可以自动协调,从而可以完美地识别所有变量的不一致性。两个数据库中相同SAE的匹配正确率为97.2%。对于高级数据管理人员来说,Reconciliaid比手动方法快6倍(范围= 3-24倍)。一个新手数据管理人员在Reconciliaid的帮助下执行三次核对比手动操作快4.8(29分钟vs 134分钟),而且错误更少。平均SUS评分为92.5分。结论:Reconciliaid具有高水平的可用性,可以提高调解质量,并大大减少调解时间,从而增加调解过程的频率,并将资源集中在患者安全和医疗评估上。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety
Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety Medicine-Pharmacology (medical)
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
4.50%
发文量
31
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety delivers the highest quality peer-reviewed articles, reviews, and scholarly comment on pioneering efforts and innovative studies pertaining to the safe use of drugs in patients. The journal has a strong clinical and pharmacological focus and is aimed at clinicians and researchers in drug safety, providing a forum in print and online for publishing the highest quality articles in this area. The editors welcome articles of current interest on research across all areas of drug safety, including therapeutic drug monitoring, pharmacoepidemiology, adverse drug reactions, drug interactions, pharmacokinetics, pharmacovigilance, medication/prescribing errors, risk management, ethics and regulation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信