This study examined the potential significant differences in the distribution of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) by reporter (consumer versus physician) and patient outcome at case and event level. This study also contains exploratory questions to evaluate reporting of ADRs by consumers versus physician by system organ class (SOC) and reporter demographics within the United States Food & Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). The theoretical foundation applied in this quantitative study was the social amplification of risk framework. Data from the second quarter of 2016 were obtained from FAERS, and a total of 87,807 ADR reports corresponding to 143,399 ADRs were analyzed by utilizing the chi-square test, the odds ratio, and logistic regression. Cross-sectional design was employed to compare reporting of ADRs at the case and event level (case-based and event-based analyses, respectively) between reporters (consumer versus physician), specifically, for patient outcome, as well as SOC and reporter demographics. For both the case-based and event-based analyses, findings revealed that consumers reported more serious ADRs in comparison to physicians. Furthermore, findings confirmed a difference in ADR reporting between consumers and physicians depending on SOC groups. Additionally, consumers reported more nonserious ADRs in comparison to physicians. The results from this study may have implications for positive social change by augmenting pharmacovigilance systems at a national and international level to identify risks and risk factors spontaneously reported after drugs have been on the market.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:waldenu.edu/oai:scholarworks.waldenu.edu:dissertations-7334 |
| Date | 01 January 2018 |
| Creators | Lamb, James Alexander |
| Publisher | ScholarWorks |
| Source Sets | Walden University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies |
Page generated in 0.0027 seconds