Characteristics and predictors of off-label use of antipsychotics in general population sample.

OBJECTIVE: Increasing number of people have been prescribed antipsychotics (APs) off-label in recent decades. This study aimed to identify the characteristics and predictors of receiving prescription of antipsychotics off-label. METHODS: The study sample was part of the Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966 (n = 7071). Data included questionnaires and national register data. Information on prescribed medications was extracted from the national register. The sample was divided into three groups: Persons who had been prescribed APs off-label (n = 137), individuals with non-psychotic mental disorders without APs off label (n = 1478) and individuals who had been diagnosed with psychosis or bipolar disorder and who had been prescribed APs (n = 151). We compared sociodemographic, lifestyle and clinical characteristics between the off-label and the comparison groups using logistic regression. RESULTS: The most common diagnoses in the off-label group were depression (n = 96, 70.1%) and anxiety (n = 55, 40.1%). Compared with individuals with non-psychotic mental disorders who were not prescribed APs off-label, individuals with prescribed off-label APs had a lower level of education, lower socioeconomic status, were less often married, had a higher level of somatic and psychiatric morbidity, were more often smokers and more often had a substance abuse disorder and heavy alcohol consumption. When comparing the off-label group to individuals with psychosis or bipolar disorder who used APs, there were less differences, though individuals with psychosis or bipolar disorder had more markers of morbidity and a lower level of education. CONCLUSION: Individuals who had been prescribed APs off label had a higher level of mental and somatic morbidity and poorer socioeconomic status than individuals with non-psychotic mental disorders who did not use APs.

The Risks and Outcomes Resulting From Medication Errors Reported in the Finnish Tertiary Care Units:: A Cross-Sectional Retrospective Register Study.

Background: Hospital-acquired medication errors (MEs) are common in health care. Although voluntary reporting is criticized for not producing reliable estimates on ME frequency, it provides valuable knowledge on errors occurring in the medication process. Objective: The purpose of this study was to analyze and determine the risks and outcomes resulting from MEs related to the TOP15 medicines in the Finnish tertiary care units from July 2016 to July 2017. Methods: The data consisting of 1,447 ME reports was organized according to ATC classification, after which TOP15 medicines involved in the reports were selected. Inductive content analysis was performed to the reports. After this, the reports were categorized by ME outcome into five categories and further analyzed accordingly. Results: The most common ME outcome in the reports was "omitted medicine" (33.9%). More than a quarter (27.1%) of ME reports were estimated to cause moderate or severe risk to the patient. When compared with each other, none of the outcome groups were more susceptible to high-risk events (p = 0.71). Of the TOP15 medicines, only Norepinephrine had significantly higher risk of being involved in high-risk events (OR 2.43, 95%CI 1.35-4.61). Conclusion: Voluntary reporting has an important role in the development of medication safety and the overall medication process within organizations. Although majority of the TOP15 medicines were involved in MEs resulting in seemingly high-risk outcomes, they were estimated to be insignificant or minor within the reporting unit. In the future, more emphasis will be needed for the assessment and analysis of the reports for more efficient, real-time detection and response to signals from health care units.

The prevalence of medication-related adverse events in inpatients-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Adverse drug events (ADEs) have been internationally recognized as a major threat to patient safety. The purpose of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis focusing on inpatient ADEs in the Western World to provide better estimate of the current state of medication safety in these countries. METHODS: The studies for meta-analysis were identified through electronic search in Cochrane, Scopus, Medline, and Web of science databases. Included articles focused on adult inpatient ADEs, had commonly accepted definition for ADE, and were conducted between 2000 and 2016. Disease or ADE-specific studies were excluded. Meta-analysis was conducted on the prevalence of inpatient ADEs and fatal adverse drug reactions (FADRs). RESULTS: The pooled estimate of the prevalence of inpatient ADEs was formed by 46,626 patient records included in 9 articles. Inpatient ADE prevalence was 19 and 32.3% of these ADEs were assessed preventable (MD 28.6%, SD 22.6%). Three articles including 3385 patients focused on inpatient FADRs, but the pooled estimate of this was disregarded due to low number and high heterogeneity of the included studies. CONCLUSIONS: ADEs are estimated to affect 19% of inpatients during hospitalization. Most of the ADEs are moderate in severity causing no permanent harm to the patient. Only a small amount of ADEs cause inpatient deaths, but in this meta-analysis, however, we were unable to give direct estimate of the prevalence.

Hospitalizations Due to Adverse Drug Events in the Elderly-A Retrospective Register Study.

Adverse drug events (ADEs) are more likely to affect geriatric patients due to physiological changes occurring with aging. Even though this is an internationally recognized problem, similar research data in Finland is still lacking. The aim of this study was to determine the number of geriatric medication-related hospitalizations in the Finnish patient population and to discover the potential means of recognizing patients particularly at risk of ADEs. The study was conducted retrospectively from the 2014 emergency department patient records in Oulu University Hospital. A total number of 290 admissions were screened for ADEs, adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and drug-drug interactions (DDIs) by a multi-disciplinary research team. Customized Naranjo scale was used as a control method. All admissions were categorized into "probable," "possible," or "doubtful" by both assessment methods. In total, 23.1% of admissions were categorized as "probably" or "possibly" medication-related. Vertigo, falling, and fractures formed the largest group of ADEs. The most common ADEs were related to medicines from N class of the ATC-code system. Age, sex, residence, or specialty did not increase the risk for medication-related admission significantly (min p = 0.077). Polypharmacy was, however, found to increase the risk (OR 3.3; 95% CI, 1.5-6.9; p = 0.01). In conclusion, screening patients for specific demographics or symptoms would not significantly improve the recognition of ADEs. In addition, as ADE detection today is largely based on voluntary reporting systems and retrospective manual tracking of errors, it is evident that more effective methods for ADE detection are needed in the future.