Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40463907›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025

Application of global trigger tool to determine the prevalence of adverse drug reactions in adult patients admitted to general and COVID-19 intensive care units.

Rafael Nogueira de Souza, Marília Berlofa Visacri, Fabiana Bragança Albanese Trotta, Deise de Souza Ventura, Mauricio Wesley Perroud, Patrícia Moriel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Rafael Nogueira de SouzaSchool of Medical Sciences (FCM), Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Marília Berlofa VisacriSchool of Medical Sciences (FCM), Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Fabiana Bragança Albanese TrottaSchool of Medical Sciences (FCM), Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Deise de Souza VenturaSchool of Medical Sciences (FCM), Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Mauricio Wesley PerroudSchool of Medical Sciences (FCM), Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Patrícia MorielSchool of Medical Sciences (FCM), Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The primary aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in adult patients admitted to a general adult intensive care unit (G-ICU) and a COVID-19 adult intensive care unit (C19-ICU). The secondary aims were to characterize patients in both ICUs; identify factors associated with the occurrence of ADRs; assess the performance of triggers in detecting ADRs; describe ADRs in terms of severity, mechanism, causality, and suspected drugs; and compare the trigger tool methodology with spontaneous reporting. Methods: This was a descriptive and retrospective study involving the application of triggers adapted from the Global Trigger Tool to identify ADRs through the analysis of physical and electronic medical records, medical prescriptions, and laboratory test results of adult patients admitted to the G-ICU and C19-ICU of a tertiary hospital in Sumaré (HES), São Paulo, Brazil, from January 2020 to December 2020. The patients were characterized by sex, age, length of stay, clinical outcome (discharge or death), and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores. The performance of triggers in detecting ADRs was determined by calculating positive predictive value (PPV). ADRs were characterized by severity, mechanism, causality, and suspected drugs. The 2020 spontaneous reporting database at the HES was analyzed, and ADRs from the ICUs were identified. Results: The study evaluated 135 patients (56.3% from the G-ICU and 43.7% from the C19-ICU), with a predominance of males (54.8%) and a mean age of 61.0 ± 15.1 years. The mean hospital stay was 13.0 ± 11.0 days, the average SOFA score throughout hospitalization was 8.4 ± 3.8, and the ICU mortality rate was 69.6%. Of the 135 admitted patients, 55 (40.7%) presented with at least one ADR, of which 31 (52.5%) were admitted to the C19-ICU. The length of hospitalization was associated with the presence of ADR in both ICUs studied and age only in the C19-ICU. Additionally, patients admitted to the C19-ICU had a 2.4 times higher risk of developing ADRs. A total of 85 ADRs were identified, 65 (76.5%) of which occurred through triggers. The triggers with the best performance in detecting ADRs, with a PPV of 100%, were "Partial Thromboplastin Time >50," "Skin Rash," "Protamine," and "Hydroxyzine." Most ADRs were moderate (56.5%), Type A (96.5%), and classified as possible (64.7%). Insulin was the drug most frequently associated with ADRs, with 22 occurrences. Only five ADRs in ICU patients were spontaneously reported in 2020. Conclusion: Of all the patients, 40.7% experienced at least one ADR during hospitalization. The number of ADRs identified by the trigger tool was significantly higher than those reported spontaneously. This demonstrates that using triggers to investigate ADRs is an effective method to significantly enhance an institution's pharmacovigilance actions.

Indexed as

adverse drug reactionCOVID-19intensive care unitpharmacovigilancetrigger tool

Identifiers

PMID40463907
PMCPMC12129966

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.