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
. 2018 Jul;27(7):695-706.
doi: 10.1002/pds.4434. Epub 2018 Apr 16.

A review of studies evaluating the effectiveness of risk minimisation measures in Europe using the European Union electronic Register of Post-Authorization Studies

Pareen Vora  1 , Esther Artime  2 , Montse Soriano-Gabarró  1 , Nawab Qizilbash  2   3 , Vineet Singh  4 , Alex Asiimwe  1
Affiliations
Review

A review of studies evaluating the effectiveness of risk minimisation measures in Europe using the European Union electronic Register of Post-Authorization Studies

Pareen Vora et al. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2018 Jul.

Abstract

Purpose: An important element of risk management is the planning and implementation of risk minimisation measures (RMMs) and the evaluation of their effectiveness by process or outcome indicators. The aim of this review is to summarize the characteristics of risk minimisation (RM) effectiveness studies in Europe and provide an overview of RMMs and their effectiveness.

Methods: This was a qualitative review of RM effectiveness studies in the European Union electronic Register of Post-Authorization Studies (EU PAS Register); data extracted included study design, population, sample size, data sources, drug information, RMMs, study period, indicators, and their reported effectiveness.

Results: Of the 872 records in the EU PAS Register, 19 studies evaluating the effectiveness of RMMs were included. Eleven were cross-sectional surveys and 8 used secondary data sources. Eighty-nine percent (17/19) evaluated additional RMMs (used when routine RMMs are considered insufficient), and 36% (7/19) evaluated changes in routine RMMs (applicable to all medicinal products). A total of 42 effectiveness indicators were identified: 18 process and 24 outcomes. Half of the indicators (21/42) were successful; 2% (1/42) indicators were partially successful; 17% (7/42) indicators were inconclusive. Effectiveness of the remaining 31% (13/42) indicators could not be determined owing to limited information. The United Kingdom was the most frequent country for the conduct of RM effectiveness studies.

Conclusions: Most of the included studies evaluated additional RMMs. Half of the effectiveness indicators (process and/or outcome) were reported as successful. This review provides evidence to support the development of future guidance on the effectiveness of RM in Europe.

Keywords: Europe; medical records; pharmacoepidemiology; review; risk management; surveys and questionnaires.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA flow diagram
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. EMA . Good pharmacovigilance practices—European Medicines Agency. http://www.ema/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/regulation/document_listing/docu.... Accessed February 15, 2017.
    1. EMA . Pharmacovigilance legislation—European Medicines Agency. http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/special_topics/general.... Accessed February 15, 2017.
    1. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS). Chapter V. Evaluating effectiveness of risk minimisation. Practical approaches to risk minimisation for medicinal products: report of CIOMS Working Group IX. Vol 2015: Geneva: Council for International Organizations of medical Sciences; 2014.
    1. EMA . Guideline on good pharmacovigilance practices (GVP) Module XVI—risk minimisation measures: selection of tools and effectiveness indicators (Rev 1). 2014; http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guidelin.... Accessed February 15, 2017.
    1. ENCePP activity report 2014. EMA; http://www.encepp.eu/publications/documents/ENCePPActivityReport2014.pdf. Accessed February 15, 2017.