IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/drugsa/v41y2018i5d10.1007_s40264-017-0630-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adverse Drug Reaction Reports Received Through the Mobile App, VigiBIP®: A Comparison with Classical Methods of Reporting

Author

Listed:
  • François Montastruc

    (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse)

  • Haleh Bagheri

    (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse)

  • Isabelle Lacroix

    (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse)

  • Christine Damase-Michel

    (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse)

  • Leila Chebane

    (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse)

  • Vanessa Rousseau

    (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse)

  • Emilie Jouanjus

    (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse)

  • Maryse Lapeyre-Mestre

    (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse)

  • Geneviève Durrieu

    (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse)

  • Jean-Louis Montastruc

    (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse)

Abstract

Introduction The use of mobile apps is increasing in medicine. In pharmacovigilance, mobile apps may help to increase adverse drug reaction reporting and improve the communication of safety issues. The Toulouse University Pharmacovigilance Center has developed VigiBIP®, a free smartphone app available on Android and Apple stores, for reporting adverse drug reactions and requesting drug safety information. Objective The present study was performed to compare the main characteristics of spontaneous adverse drug reaction reports received through VigiBIP® with classical methods of reporting (phone, e-mail, fax, letter, website) during 25 months (2015–17). Methods Using the Chi squared test, we compared the type of reporter, adverse drug reaction seriousness, drugs involved and reported ADRs using VigiBIP® and classical methods of reporting Results A total of 4102 reports were received by the Toulouse University Pharmacovigilance Center, including 4.7% through VigiBip®. Patients’ reports were significantly more frequent with VigiBip® (6.7%) than with classical methods (3.4%) [p = 0.01]. Reported adverse drug reactions and involved drugs differed according to the method of reporting used. Conclusion Our study shows that a mobile app is an additional tool used in pharmacovigilance. Types of reporters and adverse drug reactions in VigiBIP were different to those seen in classical methods of reporting.

Suggested Citation

  • François Montastruc & Haleh Bagheri & Isabelle Lacroix & Christine Damase-Michel & Leila Chebane & Vanessa Rousseau & Emilie Jouanjus & Maryse Lapeyre-Mestre & Geneviève Durrieu & Jean-Louis Montastru, 2018. "Adverse Drug Reaction Reports Received Through the Mobile App, VigiBIP®: A Comparison with Classical Methods of Reporting," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 511-514, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:41:y:2018:i:5:d:10.1007_s40264-017-0630-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s40264-017-0630-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40264-017-0630-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40264-017-0630-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:41:y:2018:i:5:d:10.1007_s40264-017-0630-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40264 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.