沙特阿拉伯药物不良事件的规模和特征:一项系统综述。

IF 1.3 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Lina Alharbi, Duaa Almuraee, Lama AteeqAllah, Wareef Belal, Sheraz Ali
{"title":"沙特阿拉伯药物不良事件的规模和特征:一项系统综述。","authors":"Lina Alharbi, Duaa Almuraee, Lama AteeqAllah, Wareef Belal, Sheraz Ali","doi":"10.4103/sjmms.sjmms_582_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>We aimed to determine the prevalence, nature, and identification methods of the adverse drug events (ADEs) as well as explore if standard definitions were utilized while assessing ADEs in Saudi Arabia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched MEDLINE via PubMed and Embase from their inceptions to April 2022. We investigated experimental and observational studies conducted in Saudi Arabia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We screened 14,398 records and included 12 studies. This review indicated that the incidence of ADEs ranged from 0.58% to 74.2%, while three cross-sectional study reports highlighted that the proportion of subjects experiencing ADEs ranged from 28% to 98.5%. This wide variation can be attributed to factors such as diverse study designs, measurement variability, and heterogeneous populations. ADR was the most frequently reported type of ADE in all studies. Chart review (58%) was the commonly utilized ADE detection method, followed by patient interviews (25%), and trigger tools (17%). Five studies (42%) used their own ADE definition, and only one study (8%) reported the standard ADE definition; however, half of the studies (<i>n</i> = 6) did not report any ADE definition.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This systematic review suggests that ADE prevalence varied between studies, with chart review being the most used approach for ADE identification in Saudi Arabia, followed by patient interviews. ADR was the most common type of ADE among all studies. Further, most studies did not use the standard ADE definitions. To improve medication safety and patient care outcomes, our review highlights the crucial need for standardized ADE detection and reporting practices in Saudi Arabia. Future research should prioritize prospective studies with standardized methodologies to accurately assess ADE prevalence rates and evaluate the impact of interventions on reducing ADEs in Saudi Arabia.</p>","PeriodicalId":21442,"journal":{"name":"Saudi Journal of Medicine & Medical Sciences","volume":"13 2","pages":"79-89"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12063962/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Magnitude and Characteristics of Adverse Drug Events in Saudi Arabia: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Lina Alharbi, Duaa Almuraee, Lama AteeqAllah, Wareef Belal, Sheraz Ali\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/sjmms.sjmms_582_24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>We aimed to determine the prevalence, nature, and identification methods of the adverse drug events (ADEs) as well as explore if standard definitions were utilized while assessing ADEs in Saudi Arabia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched MEDLINE via PubMed and Embase from their inceptions to April 2022. We investigated experimental and observational studies conducted in Saudi Arabia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We screened 14,398 records and included 12 studies. This review indicated that the incidence of ADEs ranged from 0.58% to 74.2%, while three cross-sectional study reports highlighted that the proportion of subjects experiencing ADEs ranged from 28% to 98.5%. This wide variation can be attributed to factors such as diverse study designs, measurement variability, and heterogeneous populations. ADR was the most frequently reported type of ADE in all studies. Chart review (58%) was the commonly utilized ADE detection method, followed by patient interviews (25%), and trigger tools (17%). Five studies (42%) used their own ADE definition, and only one study (8%) reported the standard ADE definition; however, half of the studies (<i>n</i> = 6) did not report any ADE definition.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This systematic review suggests that ADE prevalence varied between studies, with chart review being the most used approach for ADE identification in Saudi Arabia, followed by patient interviews. ADR was the most common type of ADE among all studies. Further, most studies did not use the standard ADE definitions. To improve medication safety and patient care outcomes, our review highlights the crucial need for standardized ADE detection and reporting practices in Saudi Arabia. Future research should prioritize prospective studies with standardized methodologies to accurately assess ADE prevalence rates and evaluate the impact of interventions on reducing ADEs in Saudi Arabia.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Saudi Journal of Medicine & Medical Sciences\",\"volume\":\"13 2\",\"pages\":\"79-89\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12063962/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Saudi Journal of Medicine & Medical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/sjmms.sjmms_582_24\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Saudi Journal of Medicine & Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/sjmms.sjmms_582_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:我们旨在确定药物不良事件(ADEs)的患病率、性质和识别方法,并探讨在沙特阿拉伯评估ADEs时是否使用了标准定义。方法:通过PubMed和Embase系统检索MEDLINE自创建至2022年4月。我们调查了在沙特阿拉伯进行的实验和观察性研究。结果:我们筛选了14398份记录,包括12项研究。本综述显示,ade的发生率从0.58%到74.2%不等,而三份横断面研究报告强调,发生ade的受试者比例从28%到98.5%不等。这种广泛的差异可归因于不同的研究设计、测量变异性和异质人群等因素。ADR是所有研究中最常见的ADE类型。图表回顾(58%)是常用的ADE检测方法,其次是患者访谈(25%)和触发工具(17%)。5项研究(42%)使用了他们自己的ADE定义,只有1项研究(8%)报告了标准ADE定义;然而,有一半的研究(n = 6)没有报道任何ADE的定义。结论:本系统综述表明,ADE的患病率在研究之间存在差异,在沙特阿拉伯,图表回顾是最常用的ADE识别方法,其次是患者访谈。ADR是所有研究中最常见的ADE类型。此外,大多数研究没有使用标准的ADE定义。为了改善用药安全和患者护理结果,我们的综述强调了沙特阿拉伯标准化ADE检测和报告实践的关键必要性。未来的研究应优先考虑采用标准化方法的前瞻性研究,以准确评估ADE的患病率,并评估干预措施对降低沙特阿拉伯ADE的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Magnitude and Characteristics of Adverse Drug Events in Saudi Arabia: A Systematic Review.

Aims: We aimed to determine the prevalence, nature, and identification methods of the adverse drug events (ADEs) as well as explore if standard definitions were utilized while assessing ADEs in Saudi Arabia.

Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE via PubMed and Embase from their inceptions to April 2022. We investigated experimental and observational studies conducted in Saudi Arabia.

Results: We screened 14,398 records and included 12 studies. This review indicated that the incidence of ADEs ranged from 0.58% to 74.2%, while three cross-sectional study reports highlighted that the proportion of subjects experiencing ADEs ranged from 28% to 98.5%. This wide variation can be attributed to factors such as diverse study designs, measurement variability, and heterogeneous populations. ADR was the most frequently reported type of ADE in all studies. Chart review (58%) was the commonly utilized ADE detection method, followed by patient interviews (25%), and trigger tools (17%). Five studies (42%) used their own ADE definition, and only one study (8%) reported the standard ADE definition; however, half of the studies (n = 6) did not report any ADE definition.

Conclusions: This systematic review suggests that ADE prevalence varied between studies, with chart review being the most used approach for ADE identification in Saudi Arabia, followed by patient interviews. ADR was the most common type of ADE among all studies. Further, most studies did not use the standard ADE definitions. To improve medication safety and patient care outcomes, our review highlights the crucial need for standardized ADE detection and reporting practices in Saudi Arabia. Future research should prioritize prospective studies with standardized methodologies to accurately assess ADE prevalence rates and evaluate the impact of interventions on reducing ADEs in Saudi Arabia.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Saudi Journal of Medicine & Medical Sciences
Saudi Journal of Medicine & Medical Sciences MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Saudi Journal of Medicine & Medical Sciences (SJMMS) is the official scientific journal of Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University. It is an international peer-reviewed, general medical journal. The scope of the Journal is to publish research that will be of interest to health specialties both in academic and clinical practice. The Journal aims at disseminating high-powered research results with the objective of turning research into knowledge. It seeks to promote scholarly publishing in medicine and medical sciences. The Journal is published in print and online. The target readers of the Journal include all medical and health professionals in the health cluster such as in medicine, dentistry, nursing, applied medical sciences, clinical pharmacology, public health, etc.
×
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