Exploring Risk Factors for Adverse Reactions in Children with an Acute Psychotic Episode Using the Global Trigger Tool: Does Age Matter?

被引:0
|
作者
Ivashchenko, Dmitriy V. [1 ]
Buromskaya, Nina I. [2 ]
Shimanov, Pavel V. [2 ]
Shevchenko, Yuriy S. [1 ]
Sychev, Dmitriy A. [3 ]
机构
[1] Russian Med Acad Continuous Profess Educ, Child Psychiat & Psychotherapy Dept, 2-1-1 Barrikadnaya, Moscow 125993, Russia
[2] Sci Pract Childrens & Adolescents Mental Hlth Ctr, Moscow, Russia
[3] Russian Med Acad Continuous Profess Educ, Dept Clin Pharmacol & Therapeut, Moscow, Russia
关键词
adolescents; adverse effect; age; antipsychotics; global trigger tool; psychosis; safety; DOUBLE-BLIND; DRUG-REACTIONS; ADOLESCENTS; EVENTS; SCHIZOPHRENIA; OLANZAPINE; HARM; PLACEBO;
D O I
10.1089/cap.2024.0012
中图分类号
R72 [儿科学];
学科分类号
100202 ;
摘要
Aim: To establish significant risk factors for the development of adverse drug effects (ADEs) in children and adolescents with an acute psychotic episode taking antipsychotics.Materials and Methods: The research team randomly selected 15 patient records each month for 3 years (2016-2018). Overall, 450 patient records were included (223 boys and 227 girls, mean age was 14.52 +/- 2.21 years). Adverse effects were identified using the standard algorithm of the Global Trigger Tool method. A "trigger" is an indication that an adverse reaction is likely to occur, e.g., an antihistamine prescription on a prescribing list. When a trigger was detected, the case history was studied in further detail to confirm the occurrence of ADEs. We divided patients into two groups: the "children" group (under 12 years old) and the "adolescents" group (13 years and older). Data were analyzed using the statistical package IBM SPSS Statistics 23.0.Results: Of the 450 patient records, 402 (89.3%) had at least one trigger detected. In total, 126 case histories contained evidence of ADE (28%). The total number of ADEs per 1000 patient days was 5.39 and the number of ADEs per 100 admissions was 32.0. Among adolescents, two or more triggers per patient were significantly more frequently identified (61.3% vs. 44.6%; p = 0.001). ADEs were rare in "Children" compared with "Adolescents" (13.8% vs. 30.4%; p = 0.006). The logistic regression analysis confirmed high predictive role of "Adolescence" (odds ratio [OR] = 2.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22-5.4; p = 0.013), "Polypharmacy" (OR = 1.96; 95% CI 1.23-3.1; p = 0.004), and "First-life hospitalization" (OR = 2.17; 95% CI 1.34-3.48; p = 0.001) for ADE fact in patient records.Conclusion: We found that significant risk factors for ADEs to antipsychotics in patients with acute psychotic episode were adolescence (13 years and older), polypharmacy, and first-life hospitalization. The fact that children (i.e., younger than 13 years of age) are less likely to experience ADEs was not associated with high-risk drugs or higher doses in our study.
引用
收藏
页码:319 / 326
页数:8
相关论文
共 22 条
  • [1] Antipsychotics safety in adolescents with acute psychotic episode: Global trigger tool implication study
    Arzamastseva, A.
    Ivashchenko, D.
    Buromskaya, N.
    Savchenko, L.
    Shevchenko, Y.
    Sychev, D.
    EUROPEAN NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 2019, 29 : S320 - S321
  • [2] Global trigger tool in child psychiatry: Treatment safety evaluation in adolescents with an acute psychotic episode
    Ivashchenko, Dmitriy
    Buromskaya, Nina
    Savchenko, Lyudmila
    Shevchenko, Yuriy
    Sychev, Dmitriy
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RISK & SAFETY IN MEDICINE, 2020, 31 (01): : 25 - 35
  • [3] Global trigger tool to measure drug safety in adolescents with acute psychotic episode: the first experience in child psychiatry
    Ivashchenko, D.
    Buromskaya, N.
    Savchenko, L.
    Shevchenko, Y.
    Sychev, D.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2019, 75 : S81 - S81
  • [4] Adverse drug reactions detected using global trigger tool in patients undergoing surgery
    Montane, Eva
    Pocino, Angelica
    Roca, Josep
    Francisco Julian, Juan
    Pares, David
    Maldonado, Sandra
    Hernandez, Angelica L.
    Sanz, Yolanda
    Maria Barriocanal, Ana
    Ballester, Monica
    BASIC & CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY, 2018, 123 : 45 - 45
  • [5] Adverse drug events in Chinese pediatric inpatients and associated risk factors: a retrospective review using the Global Trigger Tool
    Ji, Huan-huan
    Song, Lin
    Xiao, Jian-wen
    Guo, Yu-xia
    Wei, Ping
    Tang, Ting-ting
    Tian, Xiao-jiang
    Tang, Xue-wen
    Jia, Yun-tao
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2018, 8
  • [6] Adverse drug events in Chinese pediatric inpatients and associated risk factors: a retrospective review using the Global Trigger Tool
    Huan-huan Ji
    Lin Song
    Jian-wen Xiao
    Yu-xia Guo
    Ping Wei
    Ting-ting Tang
    Xiao-jiang Tian
    Xue-wen Tang
    Yun-tao Jia
    Scientific Reports, 8
  • [7] Exploring similarities and differences in hospital adverse event rates between Norway and Sweden using Global Trigger Tool
    Deilkas, Ellen Tveter
    Risberg, Madeleine Borgstedt
    Haugen, Marion
    Lindstrom, Jonas Christoffer
    Nylen, Urban
    Rutberg, Hans
    Michael, Soop
    BMJ OPEN, 2017, 7 (03):
  • [8] Patient-specific risk factors of adverse drug events in adult inpatients - evidence detected using the Global Trigger Tool method
    Harkanen, Marja
    Kervinen, Marjo
    Ahonen, Jouni
    Voutilainen, Ari
    Turunen, Hannele
    Vehvilainen-Julkunen, Katri
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2015, 24 (3-4) : 582 - 591
  • [9] Exploring the incidence and nature of nursing-sensitive orthopaedic adverse events: A multicenter cohort study using Global Trigger Tool
    Hommel, Ami
    Magneli, Martin
    Samuelsson, Bodil
    Schildmeijer, Kristina
    Sjostrand, Desiree
    Goransson, Katarina E.
    Unbeck, Maria
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING STUDIES, 2020, 102
  • [10] Detection of Adverse Events in an Acute Geriatric Hospital over a 6-Year Period Using the Global Trigger Tool
    Suarez, Cristina
    Dolores Menendez, Maria
    Alonso, Josefina
    Castano, Nieves
    Alonso, Marta
    Vazquez, Fernando
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY, 2014, 62 (05) : 896 - 900