Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016 Apr 11:7:90.
doi: 10.3389/fphar.2016.00090. eCollection 2016.

Patient Participation and the Use of Ehealth Tools for Pharmacoviligance

Affiliations
Review

Patient Participation and the Use of Ehealth Tools for Pharmacoviligance

Joëlle Berrewaerts et al. Front Pharmacol. .

Abstract

In recent years, pharmacovigilance has undergone some major changes. First, the patient's active role in identifying and describing adverse drug reactions (ADRs) has gained recognition. Second, pharmacovigilance has increasingly incorporated information and communications technology (ICT). Patients can now upload their own reports of ADRs online. Data on intensive medication monitoring are now collected via the Internet and smartphones. Worldwide collection of AEs using smart phones might become the leading technique in Low and Middle Income Countries where broad mobile phone service can be managed cheaper than Internet communication. At the same time, researchers are exploring the potential for data sharing via online forums and Internet search engines. In particular we synthetize the Pros and cons of the various methods for gathering pharmacovigilance data (i.e., Web-based spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions; Intensive drug monitoring studies; Analysis of online forum postings; Use of mobile phone systems to monitor drug effects). This article describes these advances and highlights their respective contributions.

Keywords: adverse drug reactions; adverse events; ehealth; intensive medication monitoring; mobile apps; patient participation; pharmacovigilance; web-based reporting.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Abadie D., Chebane L., Bert M., Durrieu G., Montastruc J. L. (2014). Online reporting of adverse drug reactions: a study from a French regional pharmacovigilance center. Therapie 69 395–400. 10.2515/therapie/2014035 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Abou Taam M., Rossard C., Cantaloube L., Bouscaren N., Roche G., Pochard L., et al. (2014). Analysis of patients’ narratives posted on social media websites on benfluorex’s (Mediator(R)) withdrawal in France. J. Clin. Pharm. Ther. 39 53–55. 10.1111/jcpt.12103 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Adams S. A. (2013). Using patient-reported experiences for pharmacovigilance? Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 194 63–68. - PubMed
    1. Adedeji A. A., Sanusi B., Tella A., Akinsanya M., Ojo O., Akinwunmi M. O., et al. (2011). Exposure to anti-malarial drugs and monitoring of adverse drug reactions using toll-free mobile phone calls in private retail sector in Sagamu, Nigeria: implications for pharmacovigilance. Malar. J. 10 230 10.1186/1475-2875-10-230 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Aljadhey H., Alyabsi M., Alrwisan A., Alqahtani N., Almutairi R., Al Tawil E., et al. (2012). The safety of H1N1 vaccine in children in Saudi Arabia: a cohort study using modern technology in a developing country. Drug Saf. 35 555–561. 10.2165/11597450-000000000-00000 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources