Cutaneous adverse drug reactions in a tertiary care setup: A cross-sectional observational single-center-based study in Eastern India

Ritika Singh, Nikhil Era, Shatavisa Mukherjee, P. Paul, S. Bordoloi
{"title":"Cutaneous adverse drug reactions in a tertiary care setup: A cross-sectional observational single-center-based study in Eastern India","authors":"Ritika Singh, Nikhil Era, Shatavisa Mukherjee, P. Paul, S. Bordoloi","doi":"10.4103/jopcs.jopcs_57_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Cutaneous adverse drug reactions (cADRs) constitute a significant cause of mortality and morbidity, adding to the economic burden for the patients. cADRs have varied and diverse presentations of morphology and severity. The present study aimed to explore the spectrum of cADRs reported in a tertiary care setup in Eastern India. Methods: A cross-sectional, single-center-based observational study was undertaken which included all the patients reporting with suspected cADRs. The patient details, ADR characteristics, and other relevant details were noted. Detailed pharmacovigilance workup, including causality, severity, and preventability assessment, was performed. Data were statistically analyzed. Results: 0.16% incidence of cADRs was observed, with the most common form being urticaria, followed by fixed drug eruption, maculopapular rash, and erythroderma. The most common drug class suspected to cause cADR was antimicrobials, followed by corticosteroids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. While most reactions were of moderate grade in severity, majority of the reactions were under “possible” causal category. 22.1% of the reported cADRs were not preventable. Conclusion: Proper diagnosis and optimum management of cutaneous ADRs are critically challenging and important.","PeriodicalId":93784,"journal":{"name":"Journal of primary care specialties : official publication of the Institute of Family Medicine and Primary Care","volume":"24 1","pages":"67 - 71"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of primary care specialties : official publication of the Institute of Family Medicine and Primary Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jopcs.jopcs_57_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Cutaneous adverse drug reactions (cADRs) constitute a significant cause of mortality and morbidity, adding to the economic burden for the patients. cADRs have varied and diverse presentations of morphology and severity. The present study aimed to explore the spectrum of cADRs reported in a tertiary care setup in Eastern India. Methods: A cross-sectional, single-center-based observational study was undertaken which included all the patients reporting with suspected cADRs. The patient details, ADR characteristics, and other relevant details were noted. Detailed pharmacovigilance workup, including causality, severity, and preventability assessment, was performed. Data were statistically analyzed. Results: 0.16% incidence of cADRs was observed, with the most common form being urticaria, followed by fixed drug eruption, maculopapular rash, and erythroderma. The most common drug class suspected to cause cADR was antimicrobials, followed by corticosteroids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. While most reactions were of moderate grade in severity, majority of the reactions were under “possible” causal category. 22.1% of the reported cADRs were not preventable. Conclusion: Proper diagnosis and optimum management of cutaneous ADRs are critically challenging and important.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
三级医疗机构的皮肤药物不良反应:印度东部的一项横断面观察性单中心研究
背景:皮肤药物不良反应(cADRs)是导致死亡和发病的重要原因,增加了患者的经济负担。cadr的形态和严重程度各不相同。本研究旨在探讨在印度东部三级医疗机构报告的cadr的频谱。方法:采用一项横断面、单中心的观察性研究,纳入所有报告疑似cadr的患者。记录患者详细情况、不良反应特征及其他相关细节。进行了详细的药物警戒检查,包括因果关系、严重程度和可预防性评估。对数据进行统计学分析。结果:cADRs发生率为0.16%,以荨麻疹最常见,其次为固定药疹、黄斑丘疹、红皮病。疑似引起cADR的最常见药物类别是抗菌素,其次是皮质类固醇和非甾体抗炎药。虽然大多数反应的严重程度为中度,但大多数反应属于“可能的”因果类别。22.1%的cadr是不可预防的。结论:皮肤不良反应的正确诊断和最佳处理具有重要的挑战性。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cutaneous adverse drug reactions in a tertiary care setup: A cross-sectional observational single-center-based study in Eastern India Knowledge and perceptions of medical students about generic medicines in a medical college in North India Acute undifferentiated fever presenting as multi-organ dysfunction: Narrowing the differential diagnosis A study on patients with pleural effusion with emphasis on pleural fluid adenosine deaminase and pleural biopsy Corticosteroid-induced avascular bone necrosis and possible association with prior COVID-19 infection
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1