Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Using a Mobile Device Application by Persons with Multiple Sclerosis: A Cluster Randomiz
- PDF / 928,517 Bytes
- 11 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 72 Downloads / 136 Views
ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE
Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Using a Mobile Device Application by Persons with Multiple Sclerosis: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial Gilles Defer1 · Sophie Fedrizzi2 · Damien Chevanne1 · François Montastruc3,4 · Anais R. Briant5 · Jean‑Jacques Parienti5,6 · Laure Peyro‑Saint‑Paul5 on behalf of the Société Francophone de la Sclérose en Plaques (SFSEP) for the French VigipSEP Study Group · Accepted: 27 September 2020 © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
Abstract Introduction Patient reporting adds value to pharmacovigilance. Encouraging it to be done through a mobile device application (App) is a method that should be evaluated. Objective This study aimed to determine whether the use of an App, compared to traditional use through e-mail, telephone, or the national website, increased suspected adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting by persons with multiple sclerosis receiving a first-line disease-modifying drug. Methods An open multi-centric, cluster-randomized controlled trial was conducted (VigipSEP study). Clusters were centers allocated (1:1) to the use of the My eReport France® App (experimental arm), and traditional reporting (control arm). Persons with multiple sclerosis initiating or switching to a first-line disease-modifying drug between April 2017 and April 2019 were included. The primary outcome was the mean number of ADR reports per patient for the center-level analysis, and the number of ADR reports per patient for the individual-level analysis using the hierarchical Poisson regression model. Results Twenty-four centers (12 per arm: six public neurologists from the multiple sclerosis academic expert centers, three public neurologists from general hospitals, and three private practice neurologists) were randomized, including 159 patients. The mean number of ADR reports per patient was significantly higher in centers that used the App: 0.47 vs 0.03 in control centers (p = 0.002). At an individual-level analysis, the experimental arm was significantly associated with a relative risk of ADR reports at 18.6 (95% confidence interval 4.1–84.2; p
Data Loading...
