RESEARCH ARTICLE:
PHARMACOVIGILANCE: THE EMERGING TREND
AND ITS FUTURE PROSPECTS.
Roohi Kesharwani 1*, Devendra Singh 2, Vishal Jacob 1
1-Institute Of Foreign Trade And Management Lodhipur Rajput, Delhi Road, Moradabad, India
2-Raj Kumar Goel Institute Of Technology, Delhi-Meerut Road, Ghaziabad, India
Corresponding address: Roohi kesharwani d/o santosh kumar kesharwani , Allahabad,
Uttar Pradesh - 211011
Email-Id: roohi4mail@gmail.com
devendrasingh.pisces@gmail.com
1
ABSTRACT:
Adverse drug reaction means a response to a medicine in the humans or animals, which is
noxious and unintended, including lack of efficacy, and which occurs at any dosage and can also
result from an overdose, misuse or abuse of a medicine .The concern for ADRs in highly
vulnerable populations is of even greater concern. Pharmacovigilance is especially important
since most of the adverse effects are reversible by modifying the dosage or omitting the
offending medicine it is now accepted to be a continuous process of evaluation accompanied by
steps to improve safe use of medicines which involves pharmaceutical companies, regulatory
authorities, health professionals and patients. The methodologies have broadened to encompass
many different types of study, with spontaneous reporting remaining the cornerstone.. All
medicines (pharmaceuticals and vaccines) have side effects. In a vast country like India with a
population of over 1.2 Billion with vast ethnic variability, different disease prevalence patterns,
practice of different systems of medicines, different socioeconomic status, it is important to have
a standardized and robust pharmacovigilance and drug safety monitoring programme for the
nation. Collecting this information in a systematic manner and analyzing the data to reach a
meaningful conclusion on the continued use of these medicines is the rationale to institute this
program for India. In this review article various hospitals survey are done and the survey
questionnaire was analyzed question wise and their percentage value was calculated. Only such
approach can greatly influence in bringing reporting culture among healthcare professionals and
may improve the reporting rates of ADR in our country. Pharmacists, as doctors opined that their
involvement may increase the reporting rate, have a greater role to play in the area of
pharmacovigilance. Our study strongly suggests that there is greater need to create awareness
and to promote the reporting of ADR among healthcare professionals of the country.
Keywords: Pharmacovigilance, Adverse drug reactions, Drug Interaction
2
INTRODUCTION:
Pharmacovigilance: The is defined by WHO as “the science and activities relating to the
detection, assessment, understanding and prevention of adverse effects or any other possible
drug‐related problems”. [1]
Drug toxicity is a relatively common phenomenon—despite a stringent drug safety and clinical
trials process, several drugs have been removed from the market being approved by National
Drug Regulatory Authorities, including US’ FDA, UK’s MHRA, and Europe’s EMEA [refer to
annex of drug withdrawals]. In addition to the removal of potentially toxic drugs from the
market, one out of every five drugs
[1]
are required to add additional warnings related to
side‐effects, contraindications, etc. Globally, only about 500,000 to 700,000 adverse event
occurrences are captured each year
[2]
—however, low‐ to middle‐ income countries, which
represent more than two‐thirds of the world’s population account for a tiny fraction of all the
ADR data.
The concern for ADRs in highly vulnerable populations is of even greater concern. For example,
in pediatrics, antiretroviral treatment (ART) intolerance and toxicity is a major cause of poor
adherence, changing medications and eventually dropping out of a treatment program. “Adverse
effects associated with antiretroviral medicines have been reported to occur in up to 30% of
HIV‐infected children on antiretroviral therapy.” Pharmacovigilance is especially important
since “most of the adverse effects are reversible by modifying the dosage or omitting the
offending medicine.” [1, 2, 3, 4]
The Pharmaceutical industry in India is valued at Rs. 90,000 Crore and is growing at the rate of
12 – 14 % per annum. Exports are growing at 25 % Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR)
every year. The total export of Pharma products is to the extent of Rs. 40,000 Crore. India is now
being recognized as the ‘Global pharmacy of Generic Drugs’ & has distinction of providing
generic quality drugs at affordable cost. India is also emerging rapidly as a hub of Global
Clinical trials & a destination for Drug Discovery & Development.
This is reflected in the fact that total number of applications received & processed has more than
doubled from around 10,000 in the Year 2005 to 22,806 in Year 2009 at CDSCO, HQ, New
3
Delhi. This includes increase in New Drug Applications, Global Clinical Trials , Market
Authorization of Vaccine & Biotech products from 1200 ,100 ,10 in Year 2005 to 1753, 262 &
137 in the Year 2009 respectively.
All medicines (pharmaceuticals and vaccines) have side effects. In a vast country like India with
a population of over 1.2 Billion with vast ethnic variability, different disease prevalence patterns,
practice of different systems of medicines, different socioeconomic status, it is important to have
a standardized and robust pharmacovigilance and drug safety monitoring programme for the
nation. Collecting this information in a systematic manner and analyzing the data to reach a
meaningful conclusion on the continued use of these medicines is the rationale to institute this
program for India.
Since, there are considerable social and economic consequences of ADRs
there is a need to engage health-care professionals, in a well structured programme to build
synergies for monitoring ADRs. The purpose of the Pharmacovigilance Program of India is to
collect, collate and analyze data to arrive at an inference to recommend regulatory interventions,
besides communicating risks to healthcare professionals and the public. [5]
FUTURE PROSPECTS:
Pharmacovigilance has been expanding in recent years, as companies are required to monitor
drug safety post launch. Drug safety issues, such as those raised by Vioxx earlier this decade,
have led to increased risk-averseness by regulators, with greater post-marketing assessment of
drugs. Many regulatory agencies require detailed pharmacovigilance, with companies bearing
extra costs, our new report also observes. Healthcare payers, prescribers and patients have high
expectations from pharmacovigilance. They want thorough information - on adverse reactions
and overall drug safety - upon which to make informed judgements.
Pharmacovigilance is now being called upon to produce clear results, expressed openly. What
will those trends mean for pharmacovigilance, from the perspectives of major stakeholders,
including the pharma and biotech industries? Where is pharmacovigilance heading? What
regulatory measures will continue, and which new processes will emerge? This new report Pharmacovigilance 2009: Present Challenges and Future Goals- explains how that field will
develop from the present onwards.
4
Clearly, pharmacovigilance is increasingly important worldwide, especially to avoid
reoccurrences of serious, costly problems damaging to the industry. Pharmacovigilance is
designed to provide crucial data on how drugs work in medical practice, from the short-term to
the long-term. This information can aid drug development and marketing if harnessed properly,
being a boon rather than a hindrance. In particular, visiongain believes that live licensing will
form a significant part of pharma regulations and drug development in coming years.
Pharmacovigilance will underpin processes and developments such as these, as this report further
explains. [6]
Medicines have helped to bring improved health and longer life to human beings. Medicines
affect the lives of hundreds of millions of people every day. But they are not without risk, and
have caused, do cause and will continue to cause harm to many people. There are also large
numbers of people who experience no evident effect at all from the drugs they take.[5,6] To be
eternally vigilant to ensure that medicines, which are developed for treatment of diseases,
actually do not do more harm than good, is one of the important pre-requisites for the progress of
medicine.
PLAN OF STUDY

Study of steps involved in ADR reporting.

Collection of data of pharmacovigilance and its status in India.

Pharmacovigilance status in respect to Ayurvedic/ herbal medicine.

Survey on ADR reporting awareness of physicians at surrounding hospitals.

Importance of Pharmacy profession in ADR reporting.
5
LITERATURE REVIEW
Pharmacovigilance is characterized by the fact that it derives its knowledge about the safety of
drugs from the clinical usage of drugs in daily practice. Pharmacovigilance is a two-way system,
which is represented by the circle of knowledge and practice. [7, 8]
In the literature pharmacovigilance is frequently put on a par with Post Marketing Surveillance.
This approach highlights pharmacovigilance’s most visible method, viz. the spontaneous
reporting system (SRS). [9]
Flow chart of the flow of information/ different level of centre involved:
NATIONAL PHARMACOVIGILANCE CENTRE
NATIONAL PHARMACOVIGILANCE PROGRAMME
PERIPHERAL PHARMACOVIGILANCE CENTRES
REGIONAL PHARMACOVIGILANCE CENTRE
ZONAL PHARMACOVIGILANCE CENTRE
NATIONAL PHARMACOVIGILANCE CENTRE:
The Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO) has initiated a country-wide
Pharmacovigilance programme under the aegis of DGHS, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
Government of India.
6
The programme is coordinated by the National Pharmacovigilance Centre at CDSCO. The
National Centre is operating under the supervision of the National Pharmacovigilance Advisory
Committee to recommend procedures and guidelines for regulatory interventions.
National pharmacovigilance’s programme:
The National Pharmacovigilance Programme was officially inaugurated by the Honorable Health
Minister Dr. Anbumani Ramadoss on 23 November, 2004 at New Delhi. The National
Pharmacovigilance Programme for India, sponsored by the World Health Organization (WHO)
and funded by the World Bank, became fully operational in January 2005.
The Programme aims to foster the culture of ADR notification in its first year of operation and
subsequently aims to generate broad based ADR data on the Indian population and share the
information with global health-care community through WHO-UMC. The nationwide
programme, sponsored and coordinated by the country’s central drug regulatory agency –
Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO) – to establish and manage a data base of
Adverse Drug Reactions (ADR) for making informed regulatory decisions regarding marketing
authorization of drugs in India for ensuring safety of drugs. [7]
Under the program 26 peripheral centers, 5 Regional Centers and 2 Zonal Centers were
established. The Peripheral centers will record the Adverse Events (AE) and send to the Regional
Centers.They in turn collate and scrutinize the data received from the Peripheral Centers and
submit to the Zonal Centers. The Zonal Centers will analyze the data and submit consolidated
information to the National Pharmacovigilance Centre. The Zonal Centre will also provide
training, general support and coordinate the functioning of the Regional Center
Peripheral pharmacovigilance centers:
Primary pharmacovigilance’s centers. Relatively smaller medical institutions including
individual medical practitioners’ clinics, private hospitals, nursing homes, pharmacies etc. First
contact ADR data collection unit at a health care facility. They would be identified and
coordinated by RPCs / ZPCs in consultation with CDSCO.
Regional Pharmacovigilance Centers (RPCs):
7
Secondary pharmacovigilance centers. Relatively larger healthcare facilities attached with
medical colleges. They would act as second level centers in the administrative structure of the
nppi. They will function as first contact adr data collection units also. They would be identified
and coordinated by zpcs in consultation with the cdsco.
Zonal Pharmacovigilance:The Centre (ZPCs) :
Tertiary pharmacovigilance centers. Large healthcare facilities attached with medical colleges in
metro cities identified by the CDSCO for the purpose. They would act as third level centers in
the administrative structure of the NPPI. They will function as First contact ADE data collection
units also. [7]
THE
NATIONAL
PHARMACOVIGILANCE
ADVISORY
COMMITTEE (NPAC):
Oversee the performance of various Zonal, Regional and Peripheral Pharmacovigilance centers
as well as recommend possible regulatory measures based on the data received from various
centers. It also oversees data collection and assessment, interpretation of data as well as
publication of ADR monitoring data. The Committee also periodically evaluates their protocol
compliance levels to ensure that the data received is homogenous and can be scientifically
pooled for informed regulatory decisions. Wherever necessary, NPAC also seeks the opinion of
experts in various specializations.
The specific aims of the Pharmacovigilance Programme are to:

Contribute to the regulatory assessment of benefit, harm, effectiveness and risk of
medicines, encouraging their safe, rational and more effective (including cost effective) use.

Improve patient care and safety in relation to use of medicines and all medical and
paramedical interventions.

Improve public health and safety in relation to use of medicines.

Promote understanding, education and clinical training in pharmacovigilance and its
effective communication to the public.

Monitoring medicines as used in everyday practice to identify previously

unrecognized adverse effects or changes in the patterns of their adverse effects
8

Assessing the risks and benefits of medicines in order to determine what action,

if any, is necessary to improve their safe use

Providing information to users to optimize safe and effective use of medicines

Monitoring the impact of any action taken [10]
ADR REPORTING:
An adverse drug reaction (abbreviated ADR) is a term used to describe the unwanted, negative
Consequences sometimes associated with the use of medications. ADR is a particular type of
Adverse effect. [11]
“Adverse drug reaction" or an "adverse reaction" means a response to a medicine in the
humans or animals, which is noxious and unintended, including lack of efficacy, and which
occurs at any dosage and can also result from an overdose, misuse or abuse of a medicine. [12]
RESPONSE
ANALYSIS
DATA
Figure1: ADR (ADVERSE DRUG REACTION ) ANALYSIS CHART
The need for an effective risk management strategy was recognized by FDA as early as 1993
when Med Watch, the safety information and adverse event reporting program of FDA was
established. Currently the evaluation and risk assessment of drugs is taken care by a separate
division of FDA, the Pharmacovigilance and Epidemiology Division of CDER (Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research). [13]
9
FDA (1996), stated that the success or failure of any pharmacovigilance activity depends on the
reporting of suspected adverse reactions.[14]
The objectives of the ADR reporting system are to receive adverse events suspected to be related
to the use of medication, to evaluate drug information from reported cases as well as from
published literatures, to collect drug safety information internationally, to created information
feedback mechanisms by publishing drug safety newsletters, and to carry out education program.
The ultimate goal is to enhance rational drug usage and hence to improve public health, (DOH
1998). [15]
According to WHO (2002), reporting of ADRs can be done by Doctors, Nurses, Pharmacists and
any other health worker. The statement said that the reports can be sent to the Pharmacy
Department, Hospital or the National Pharmacovigilance centre in each country. While making
report on ADRs it is also important to include; Patient details (initials)Suspected drug name,
strength, dose and duration of treatment. The report should also include information on other
concomitant drugs, Type of ADRs, i.e All ADRs, New ADRs, ADRs in risk groups like pregnant
women, breastfeeding women, elderly, children etc. Drug interactions, Serious/unexpected
ADRs, Other drug related problems due to quality, inappropriate use etc is considered important
as well. [16]
STEPS INVOLVED IN STUDY:
Adverse drug reactions can occur when the body's immune system reacts with the chemical
compound in a drug, report doctors at the American Academy of Family Physicians. Other
reactions happen as result of allergies. Unknown causes of adverse drug reactions can happen
when a diagnosis is not clear or a patient's medical history is in question. While treatment usually
involves discontinuing the offending drug, you need to know the best way report adverse drug
reactions to receive the proper treatment.
Step 1
10
Keep the prescription bottles of your medications so healthcare providers can get the exact name
of the drug that you are taking when you have a reaction. AAFP doctors report that most drug
reactions manifest as a rash, but can be severe and cause unconsciousness.
Step 2
Be prepared to report any allergic reactions you may have had in the past to help doctors
diagnose your symptoms. Keep a record of when you started taking a new medication. Have
available a list of all medications you are currently taking, including the dosage amount.
Android Developer CPM's Earn Over 10x Higher with our Android SDK. www.airpush.com
Sponsored Links
Step 3
Show treating physicians any skin rash or other skin abnormality. You may have a fever and
trouble breathing, but any number of factors could account for those symptoms. When combined
with a skin discoloration or lesion, an adverse drug reaction diagnosis is easier to make.
Step 4
Document the treatment you received that caused the reaction as well as the results. Keep track
of dates, medical complications you underwent, the level of your reaction and how you were
treated so you can follow up with the proper reporting procedures if your doctor refuses to report
your reaction.
11
Step 5
Print the Food and Drug Administration reporting form from the FDA website and bring it to your
doctor to fill out. If you prefer not to go through your healthcare provider, the FDA does accept
reports of adverse drug reaction from consumers. This is a voluntary program that is monitored by
the FDA to follow patients' experiences with various medications.
Step 6
Call the FDA at (800) FDA-0178 if you do not have access to online reporting. Use the FDA to
report fraud or misuse of drugs as well as adverse reactions to prescribed medication, medical
devices or over-the-counter medications or supplements.[17]
COLLECTION OF DATA OF PHARMACOVIGILANCE AND ITS STATUS
IN INDIA:
The National Pharmacovigilance Advisory Committee (NPAC) monitors the performance of various
zonal, regional, and peripheral centers and performs the functions of "Review Committee" for this
program. The NPAC also recommends possible regulatory measures based on pharmacovigilance
data received from various centers. The Zonal Pharmacovigilance Centre (ZPC) and Regional
Pharmacovigilance Centre (RPC) have also been established.
The Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO)
[3]
is initiating a countrywide
pharmacovigilance program under the aegis of DGHS, MoH and Family Welfare, and Government
of India. The National Pharmacovigilance Centre at CDSCO shall coordinate the program. The
National Centre will operate under the supervision of the NPAC to recommend picadors and
guidelines for regulatory interventions.
The National Pharmacovigilance Program will have the following milestones:

Short-term objectives: To foster a culture of notification.

Medium-term objectives: To engage several healthcare professionals and Non-Government
Organizations (NGOs) in the drug monitoring and information dissemination processes.

Long-term objectives: To achieve such operational efficiencies that would make Indian
12

National Pharmacovigilance Program a benchmark for global drug monitoring endeavors.
Periodic Safety Update Reports shall be expected to be submitted every 6 monthly for the first 2
years of marketing in India, and annually for the subsequent 2 years. In addition, training programs
and
interaction
meetings
shall
be
held
every 6
months
after
the
initial
training.
All data generated (including reporting forms) will be stored and preserved for the purpose of
archiving for a minimum period of 5 years at the ZPCs. The reporting of seemingly insignificant or
common adverse reactions would be important because it may highlight a widespread prescribing
problem.[12,19]
PHARMACOVIGILANCE IN RESPECT TO AYURVEDIC AND HERBAL
MEDICINE:
AYURVEDA:
Ayurveda, the knowledge of life, immortalized in the form of elegant Sanskrit stanzas in the
samhitas describe diagnosis and therapy of disease as well as ways to maintain positive health. [ 20,21]
Although the technical term "Pharmacovigilance" does not feature in Ayurveda texts, the spirit of
pharmacovigilance is vibrant and is emphasized repeatedly in all major texts. The major goals of
pharmacovigilance, namely to improve patient care and safety in relation to drug use, and thus
promote rational drug use are recurrent themes of ayurvedic pharmacology ( dravyaguna vigyan )
and therapeutics ( chikitsa ).[22] The use of ayurvedic medicines is popular in India - and in recent
times has become accepted in other countries. For example, a recent survey conducted by the
NCCAM in the USA showed that about 751 000 people in the United States had ever used ayurveda
and 154 000 people had used them within the past 12 months. [23] Associated with this increasing use,
are growing concerns about the safety of ayurvedic medicines. [24,25] This paper discusses in brief the
ayurvedic concepts of adverse reactions to medicines, the need for pharmacovigilance of ayurvedic
medicines, challenges in introducing pharmacovigilance in ayurveda and some recommendations to
successfully implementing these activities
13
Ayurveda Concepts of Adverse Reactions:
There is a popular misconception that ayurvedic medicines are devoid of adverse reactions.
However, the Charaka Samhita , which is a classic text book of ayurveda, describes all the adverse
reactions to medicines when they are prepared or used inappropriately. Attention is given to factors
like the physical appearance of the part of the plant to be used ( prakriti ), its properties ( guna ),
actions ( karma; prabhava ), habitat ( desh ), season in which it grows ( ritu ), harvesting conditions
( grahitam ), method of storage ( nihitam ) and pharmaceutical processing ( upaskritam ), which
must be considered while selecting the starting material that goes to form the medicine. [26] Similarly,
Charaka also describes, elegantly, several host-related factors to be considered when selecting
medicines in order to minimize adverse reactions like the constitution of the patient ( prakriti ), age (
vayam ), disease ( vikruti ), tolerance (previous exposure) ( satmya ), psychological state ( satwa ),
digestive capacity ( ahara-shakti ), capacity for exercise ( vyayama shakti ), quality of tissues ( Sara
),
physical
proportions
of
the
body
(
sahanan
)
and
strength
(
bala
).
[27]
Interestingly, classical ayurveda prescribes metals and minerals as medicines given as bhasmas
(incinerated mineral formulations) or in combination with plants as herbo-mineral formulations (e.g.,
Arogyavardhini ). Manufacturing procedures for these medicines are stringent, and adverse reactions
are described when precautions are not taken while manufacturing and administering these
medicines.
[28]
Although these medicines are widely used in India, doubts about their long-term
safety come up due to the presence of toxic metals in them [29] and there are reports related to adverse
reactions.[30]
To summarize, Charaka says, "that even a strong poison can become an excellent medicine if
administered properly. On the other hand even the most useful drug can act like a poison if handled
carelessly".[31]
Need for Pharmacovigilance of Ayurvedic Medicines:
Recognized by the Government of India as a formal medical system, institutionalized training in
Ayurveda was initiated a century ago and now India has 196 under-graduate colleges and 55 post-
14
graduate centers.
[32]
The number of practitioners registered with the State Registers of Indian
Medicine is approximately 438 721. [33]
In ancient times, the ayurvedic physicians prepared medicines for their patients themselves. Today,
only a handful of practitioners follow this practice and production and sale of ayurvedic drugs has
become formalized into a thriving industry. Manufacture and marketing of ayurvedic drugs is
covered by the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. [34] Broadly speaking, two categories of medicines
labeled as "Ayurveda" are available in the market: firstly, classical ayurvedic formulations, which
are as per descriptions in Ayurveda samhitas (e.g., kutajarishta, chandraprabhavati, etc.) and
secondly patent and proprietary formulations made of extracts of herbs. [35] There are 8403 licensed
Ayurveda pharmacies and the approximate turnover of this industry is Rs. 4000 crore, which
accounts for nearly a third of the total pharmaceutics business in India. [36] This commercialization
has brought with it many challenges about safe use of Ayurveda medicines, bringing into focus the
need
for
formal
pharmacovigilance
programs
in
the
field.
And yet, the number of adverse reactions to Ayurveda drugs reported or recorded in the National
Pharmacovigilance Program in India is negligible. The strong belief that Ayurveda medicines are
safe contributes to a large extent to this situation. To compound this matter is the lack of knowledge
about the concept and importance of pharmacovigilance in Ayurveda among Ayurveda practitioners.
A recent survey conducted among Ayurveda physicians by our department examined their attitudes
toward adverse reactions of Ayurveda medicines and reporting these to authorities. Of the 80 vaidyas
interviewed, 14 refused to accept that ayurvedic drugs could produce adverse reactions and the rest
felt that adverse reactions would occur only if ayurvedic drugs were improperly manufactured and
irrationally prescribed. Of these 66 doctors, 48 physicians said that they had seen "unexpected"
reactions after administration of Ayurveda drugs in their practice. Interestingly, only 14 of these 48
said that they had reported these reactions (mostly in medical association meetings or to medical
representatives) (personal communication).
15
Challenges in Introducing Pharmacovigilance in Ayurveda:
Although the National Pharmacovigilance Program has encouraged reporting of all suspected drugrelated adverse events including those caused by herbal/traditional/alternative medicines (Protocol of
NPP, Version 1, 2004, p. 17), the number of reports related to ayurvedic/herbal drugs has been
abysmally low. Several challenges that preclude identification and reporting of adverse reactions to
ayurvedic drugs can be identified related to detection, assessment and prevention of adverse
reactions.
Detection of adverse reactions to Ayurveda medicines:
Perhaps because of the firm belief among doctors and prescribers alike, that ayurvedic drugs are safe,
the detection of adverse reactions to these medicines is a major challenge. From obtaining a correct
history, to diagnosis and to pin-pointing the causal medicine, the path is full of obstacles, including:
1. The concept and terminologies related to adverse reaction monitoring are not covered in the
Ayurveda curriculum precluding accurate identification of adverse reactions.
2. Methods to study drug safety problems have not evolved adequately in ayurveda.
3. Although information related to medicines exists in the stanzas in the ancient treatises of
Ayurveda, it is not easily accessible.
4. Signal detection is difficult because there is an inherent belief about safety of ayurvedic
medications leading to lack of reporting and collection of reports relating to any formulation.
5. Patients often use medicines from different systems of medicine concomitantly leading to
difficulties in assigning causality.
6. Lack of quality assurance and control in manufacture of ayurvedic medicine, which acts as a
confounding factor in diagnosing the adverse reaction.
7. The informal sector manufacturing and selling ayurvedic drugs on a small-scale is large and
this often makes it impossible to identify the medicine that may be causing the adverse
reaction. At our Center, for example, we receive adverse reaction reports or requests for
testing medicines for adulteration with steroids. Of the total 154 requests of adverse reactions
to ayurvedic medicines we have received over the past 5 years, we know the exact
16
ingredients (because of labeling) of ONLY 22 formulations! 132 were from the informal
sector - dispensed by the "doctor".
8. The problem of counterfeit and spurious drugs is serious. A disturbing trend noticed at our
Center is that of masquerading orthodox modern medicines as "Ayurvedic" drugs. Three
patients referred to the anti-epileptic clinical pharmacology out-patients department gave a
history of receiving "Ayurvedic" medicine for the treatment of epilepsy. They were
complaining of giddiness or gingival hyperplasia - both adverse effects associated with antiepileptic medicines. We found their plasma had carbamazepine and phenytoin in the toxic
ranges, and the capsules they were taking, which were analyzed, had 30 and 100 mg of
carbamazepine and phenytoin respectively! [37]
Assessment of adverse reactions to ayurvedic medicines:
Although several scales are available for causality assessment, applying them for ayurvedic
medicines and ascribing causality is perhaps the greatest challenge for several reasons, including:
1. Information related to adverse effects is scattered in ayurvedic literature and not in electronic
form, hence making it is difficult to access. Many publications are not in peer-reviewed
journals and the quality of available publications is questionable.
2. Most ayurvedic formulations are multi-ingredient-fixed dose formulations rarely prescribed
alone (i.e., there are multiple herbal and herbo-mineral FDCs being consumed at the same
time).
3. Additionally, there is the confounding factor that the patient is often receiving allopathic
medicines at the same time.
4. Pharmacokinetics and toxicokinetics are very difficult, and at this point of time, well nigh
impossible making definite causality virtually impossible.
5. Dose-related responses are rarely measured and reported.
6. Rarely, if ever, is de-challenge and re-challenge performed and there is no objective evidence
of the adverse event.
7. One of the most challenging aspects is the lack of expertise in performing causality analysis
17
with ayurvedic medicines. A person trained in pharmacovigilance rarely understands
ayurveda while an expert in ayurveda is not trained in the science of pharmacovigilance.
Prevention of adverse reactions to ayurvedic medicines:
The success in any pharmacovigilance system is in the ability to prevent further adverse reactions
successfully by understanding and using the information collected. With ayurvedic medicines, the
challenges would be at multiple levels.
1. Communication between the practitioners and policy makers of orthodox Western medicine
and traditional Indian medicine is not adequate. In India, the current NPVP does not have
ayurveda under its fold and therefore ayurvedic practitioners are not aware of the need to
report and where to report.
2. Unbiased drug information about ayurvedic drugs including both classical and proprietary
formulations is not available easily.
3. Patients are not adequately aware that ayurvedic medicines can cause adverse reactions and
can take medicines for years on end with no monitoring as they believe that these medicines
can do no harm. Hence, they do not even give history of taking these medicines.
4. Education in ayurveda or modern medicine at both under-graduate and post-graduate levels
does not cover pharmacovigilance of ayurvedic medicines, thus never exposing the young
physicians to this concept.
5. The ayurvedic pharmaceutical industry is not motivated to focus on pharmacovigilance of
ayurvedic medicines. Hence, there is no attempt at generating safety data - either before or
after marketing of the formulation.
6. Availability of ayurvedic medicines is unprecedented in India! It is reported that there are
over 100 books describing different ayurvedic medicines containing over 100 000 recipes for
medicines!
[38]
The formal ayurvedic formulary quotes over 630 formulations in its two
published volumes. Add to that the huge informal sector, the numbers are mind boggling.
Which medicines to include in the pharmacovigilance system?
18
Recommendations:
Based on these observations, there are several ways we can move forward in attempting to embrace
pharmacovigilance systems into ayurveda.
1. Introduce pharmacovigilance concepts into the curriculum of ayurveda at the under-graduate
and post-graduate level.
2. Encourage studies on drug safety.
3. Make reporting of adverse reactions to regulators mandatory for ayurvedic formulations.
4. Make unbiased and easily accessible drug information available. The Traditional Knowledge
Digital Library launched by the Government of India
[39]
is an example of how ancient
knowledge available in the ancient scriptures can be made digitally accessible.
5. Create awareness about the science of pharmacovigilance among ayurvedic physicians,
patients and paramedical staff.
6. Development and validation of scales to assess the causality of the reported reactions to
ayurvedic medicines.
7. Human resource development is a key feature for the success of this enterprise. It will be
necessary to train ayurvedic experts in the science of Pharmacovigilance and include them
not only in reporting but also assessment of the adverse reactions. More direct involvement of
ayurvedic Academic Institutions in the NPVP after appropriate training would be an
appropriate first step in this direction. A strong cooperative effort from experts in
Pharmacovigilance and ayurveda together can ensure that this system is up and functioning.
Pharmacovigilance in ayurvedic medicines is perhaps an unthought-of concept as yet; however, we
do not need an "Ayurvedic thalidomide" to wake the pharmacovigilance community to the need of
the hour.
HERBAL:
PHARMACOVIGILANCE OF HERBAL M EDICINES
The safety of herbal medicines has become a major concern to both national health authorities and
the general public[41]. The use of herbs in Traditional medicines continues to expand rapidly across
the world. Many people now take herbal medicines or herbal products for their health care in
19
different national health-care settings. However, mass media reports of adverse events tend to be
sensational and give a negative impression regarding the use of Herbal medicines in general rather
than identifying the causes of these events, which may relate to a variety of issues.[42]
The use of herbal and traditional medicines raises concerns in relation to their safety.
[43, 44]
There is
wide misconception that ‘natural’ means ‘safe’. There is the common belief that long use of a
medicine, based on tradition, assures both its efficacy and safety. There are examples of traditional
and herbal medicines being adulterated or contaminated with allopathic medicines, chemicals such as
corticosteroids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents and heavy metals. Many traditional
medicines are manufactured for global use and they have moved beyond the traditional and cultural
framework for which they were originally intended. Self-medication further aggravates the risk to
patients. When traditional and herbal medicines are used in conjunction with other medicines there is
the potential of serious adverse drug interactions.
As with other products intended for human use (medicines, dietary supplements and foods), herbal
medicines should be incorporated within a regulatory framework. These products should be
governed by standards of safety, quality and efficacy that are equivalent to those required for other
pharmaceutical products. Difficulties in achieving this arise from the growth of an ambiguous zone
between foods and medicines, into which an increasing number of herbal products fall. The
regulatory status of herbal products differs significantly from country to country. Currently less than
70 countries regulate herbal medicines and few countries have systems in place for the regulation of
traditional health practitioners.
These disparities in regulation between countries have serious implications for international access to
and distribution of such products. For instance, in one country a herbal product may be obtainable
only on prescription and from an authorized pharmacy, whereas in another country, it may be
obtainable from a health food shop, or even, as has become common practice, by mail order or
Internet.
For all these reasons, inclusion of herbal and traditional medicines in national pharmacovigilance
programmers has become important and inevitable. Healthcare providers, including traditional health
practitioners, regulators, manufacturers and the public share a responsibility for their informed and
20
safe use. The World Health Organization has produced guidelines for assessment of the safety,
efficacy and quality of herbal medicines.[45]
New systematic approaches for monitoring the safety of plant-derived medicinal products are being
developed.[46] A number of national pharmacovigilance centres are now monitoring the safety of
traditional medicines. For that to succeed, the collaboration and support of consumers, traditional
health practitioners, providers of traditional and herbal medicines and other experts is necessary.
More attention needs to be given to research and to training of healthcare providers and consumers in
this area.
Herbal medicines consist of plant or its part to treat injuries, disease or illnesses and are used to
prevent and treat diseases and ailments or to promote health and healing. It is a drug or preparation
made from a plant or plants and used for any of such purposes. Herbal medicines are the oldest form
of health care known to mankind .[46,47,48] World Health Organization (WHO) has defined herbal
medicines as finished, labeled medicinal products that contain active ingredients, aerial or
underground parts of the plant or other plant material or combinations. World Health Organization
has set specific guidelines for the assessment of the safety, efficacy, and quality of herbal medicines.
WHO estimates that approx 81% of the world populations presently use herbal medicine for primary
health care. [49]
Adverse Drug Reactions: Herbal remedies are not entirely free of adverse drug reactions. Some
adverse drug reactions of commonly used herbs are, Ginkgo biloba cause spontaneous bleeding, St.
John’s Wort(Hypericum perforatum) cause gastrointestinal disturbances, allergic reactions, fatigue,
dizziness, photosensitivity, confusion, Capsicum annuum cause hypertension, cardiac arrhythmias,
myocardial infarction, Ephedra cause anxiety, Vitex agnus (Chast tree fruit) cause headache, diarrhea
and Piper methysticum cause liver toxicity. [50]
Drug Interactions: Mostly patients taking drugs with a narrow therapeutic index like Cyclosporine,
Digoxin, Phenytoin, Procainamide, Theophylline, Warfarin etc. should be discouraged from using
herbal products. All drugs with narrow therapeutic index may either have increased adverse effects
or be less effective when used in conjunction with herbal products. Ginkgo is used for Alzheimer’s
disease and causes increased bleeding with aspirin. Ginseng has multiple uses and causing synergism
with monoamine oxidase inhibitors. Kava is used as anxiolytic and shows synergism with
21
benzodiazepines.
There are now many examples of the toxicity caused by the use of heavy metals in the preparations
of traditional drugs. Lead, copper, mercury, arsenic, silver and gold that are commonly added to
these preparations, have caused toxicity on many occasions. Patients should not use herbal drugs
indiscriminately with modern medicines, as there are possibilities of drug interactions and increased
risk of adverse drug reactions.
Pharmacovigilance of Herbal Medicines:
The purpose of pharmacovigilance is to detect, assess, understand and to prevent the adverse effects
or any other possible drug-related problems, related to herbal, traditionally and complementary
medicines.[51] Herbal medicines are widely used in both developed and developing countries
however, in recent years, there are several high-profile herbal safety concerns having an impact on
the public health. Herbal medicines are traditionally considered as harmless but as medicinal
products they require drug surveillance in order to identify their risks. Published data shows that the
risk is due either to a contaminant or to an added drug
Extremely limited knowledge about the constituents of herbal medicines and their effects in humans,
the lack of stringent quality control and the heterogeneous nature of herbal medicines necessitates
the continuous monitoring of the safety of these products. WHO has increased its efforts to promote
herbal safety monitoring within the context of the WHO International Drug Monitoring Programme.
Various methods in pharmacovigilance are passive surveillance includes spontaneous reporting and
stimulated reporting, active surveillance by sentinel sites, drug event monitoring, registries,
comparative observational studies by survey study, case control study, targeted clinical
investigations by investigate drug-drug interactions and food- drug interactions.[52]The importance of
genetic factors in determining an individual susceptibility to adverse drug reactions is well
documented and this implies to herbal medicines as well as to conventional drugs.
Pharmacovigilance is therefore one of the important post-marketing safety tools in ensuring the
safety of pharmaceutical and related health products .[53]
Regulatory Status of Herbal Medicines: The legal situation of herbal medicines varies from
country to country. Developing countries have folk knowledge of herbs and their use in traditional
22
medicine is wide spread. But, these countries do not have any legislative criteria to include these
traditionally used herbal medicines in drug legislation.[54] Approval of herbal medicines in most
countries is based on traditional herbal references, provided they are not known to be unsafe when
used to treat minor illnesses. But, now-a-days claims are being made to treat more serious illnesses
with herbal medicines for which no traditional knowledge is present.[55] Therefore, regulatory
requirements for herbal medicines are necessary to ensure the safety, efficacy and quality and to
support specific indications; scientific and clinical evidence must be acquired.[56] Depending upon
the nature of herbs and market availability, different requirements exist for submission of clinical
trial data and toxicity data. The regulatory requirements of herbal medicines is varies from one
country to other country. [57]
IMPORTANCE OF PHARMACY PROFESSION IN PHARMACOVIGILANCE:
Role of the Pharmacist Practitioner in Pharmacovigilance“Safety monitoring of medicines in common use should be an integral part of clinical practice.The
degree, to which clinicians are informed about the principles of pharmacovigilance, and practice
according to them, has a large impact on healthcare quality. Education and training of health
professionals in drug safety, exchange of information between national centres, the coordination of
such exchange, and linking clinical experience of drug safety with research and health policy, all
serve to enhance effective patient care. National programmes for pharmacovigilance are perfectly
placed for identifying research necessary for better understanding and treatment of drug-induced
diseases.”[58]
An effective approach in pharmacovigilance requires the use of modern informatics. FIP
recognises that pharmacists are a key part of the post-approval environment. Also, pharmacists can
provide early detection of new ADRs and other drug related problems and identify certain patient
subgroups with exceptional sensitivities.
The changing role of the pharmacist
The position of the pharmacist within the health care system has continually been subject to change.
With respect to drug dispensing several tasks can be distinguished.[59] The pharmacist’s primary
23
mission is to dispense drugs as prescribed by the physician and to ensure these drugs meet the
required standards.[60,61]
In the literature several other ways in which the pharmacist can contribute to the safe use of drugs
are mentioned. In addition to their responsibilities relating to drug dispensing and compliance and
their role in ADR reporting, which we will discuss in the next section, record keeping, education and
their role regarding over the counter (OTC) products, both conventional and alternative drugs, are
areas where they can play a prominent role.[62,63]
The pharmacist as a reporter of adverse drug reactions
This thesis specifically focuses on the significance of the pharmacist as a reporter of adverse
drug reactions. As mentioned above, in the Netherlands their contribution is substantial, which
cannot be said for the rest of the world. Not only are pharmacists not authorised to report
everywhere, even where they are, their contribution is often still relatively small.[64,65]
The contribution of the hospital pharmacist
Hospital pharmacists can also play a significant role in ADR reporting. It is in their work
environment that the most serious adverse drug events can be seen to occur.Several recent
publications have underlined the extent to which adverse drug events account for hospital
admissions. This process could best be supervised by hospital pharmacists, particularly
when they are directly involved in patientcare.[66] Several articles have specifically
highlighted this role and have suggested that hospital pharmacists could help reduce the
ADR incidence rate substantially.[67,68]
Several prerequisites need to be fulfilled to ensure that their contribution will indeed help
bring down the number of adverse events and improve ADR reporting: direct involvement in
patient care and a functional, widely supported hospital reporting system in whose management
the hospital pharmacist should have a key role.[69,70] If hospitals were to report more, this would
also enhance the surveillance of those drugs that are chiefly used in hospital settings.[69]
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE:
24
A suitable piloted self- administered survey questionnaire was designed and randomly circulated
to medical practitioners of all two hospitals where the ADR reporting and monitoring system was
implemented. The study questionnaire was designed to assess the attitude and perception of
medical practitioners towards adverse drug reaction reporting. Few changes in the order and
phrasing of the questions were made after discussion with fellow clinical pharmacists and few
physicians. The final questionnaire (Table-1) consisted of ten questions and was designed
specifically to answer the awareness about ADR reporting and monitoring system, its operational
procedure, its usefulness, their reporting culture and also to know whether the system needs any
further modification and or improvement. Questionnaire was distributed randomly to 50 medical
practitioners across two study sites [TMU (n=30); SAI (n= 20)]. In order to preclude any
potential bias the disclosure of name of the responder was made optional. All participants were
briefed about the purpose of the study and asked to submit the filled questionnaire.
ANALYSIS:
The survey questionnaire was analyzed question wise and their percentage value was calculated.
In the analysis of all questions total number of responders to questionnaire survey was
considered rather total number of responders to each question. In case of unanswered questions,
the number of responders unanswered to each question was categorized under ‘non responded’
category, and percentage value, question wise, was calculated.
RESULTS:
Out of 50 survey questionnaire, 40 filled questionnaires were returned giving response rate of
83.33%. The response rate from each study site was 80% from TMU and 86.66% from the Sai
hospital.
According to our survey reports 80% of physicians were aware of the ADRs reporting and
monitoring system in India.
25
Our survey results revealed that 80% [n =32 /40] of the responders were aware of existence of
ADR reporting and monitoring system in India and 00% [n = 00/40] of them had reported
suspected ADR to any of the pharmacovigilance centre located in India. Eighty nine percent of
responders were aware of existence of ADR reporting and monitoring system at their hospital.
Sixty four percent of responders had reported suspected ADR, while implemented ADR
reporting and monitoring system had created awareness in 05% of the responders. The
implemented ADR reporting and monitoring system has been found to be useful by 05% of
responders, and 90% of the responders opined that the implemented ADR reporting and
monitoring system had been benefiting the patient. Majority (05%) of responders expressed that
the existing system had encouraged them to report further. Fifty percent [n = 10/20] of
responders found that operating procedure of existing ADR reporting and monitoring system is
simple. Zero % [n = 00/40] of responders reported to have had received proper feedback to
reported reactions. Eighty five percent [n =34/40] of responders opined that pharmacist’s
assistance in detection, reporting, monitoring and management of adverse drug reactions is
useful. The details of attitudes and perceptions of doctors towards ADR reporting are
summarised in Table-1.
Our study findings revealed several factors that influenced the doctors from reporting ADRs.
Factors that encouraged ADR reporting included awareness creation, system was simple to
operate, acknowledging the receipt of report, provision of feedback to the reported ADRs and
constantencouragement. Factors that were considered as contributing factors for not reporting
suspected ADRs included lack of time, well-known reactions, mild adverse reactions and
immediate management of ADRs. Factors that were considered to be encouraging or
discouraging the doctors in reporting ADR are presented in Table-2.
26
TABLE 1:Table Shows attitudes and perception of doctors towards the
reporting.
PERCENTAGES
QUESTIONS
YES
NO
*NR
15
05
65
30
05
3. Have you reported any suspected adverse drug reaction to any of the 00
90
10
00
90
10
5. Has this system created an awareness of ADR reporting in you?
05
85
10
6. Do you think that existing ADR reporting and monitoring system would
90
10
00
7. Is the ADR reporting and monitoring system exists at your hospital 60
25
15
85
00
15
05
15
80
00
25
75
1. Are you aware existence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) reporting 80
and monitoring system (National pharmacovigilance’s centre) in India?
2. Are you aware of existence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) reporting
and monitoring system at your hospital?
reporting and monitoring centers?
4. Did you report any suspected adverse drug reactions to ADR reporting
and monitoring system existing at your hospital?
benefit the patient or improve the patient care?
useful for your practice?
8. Is pharmacists’ assistance in detection, reporting and management of
adverse drug reaction useful?
9. Does the ADR reporting and monitoring system exist at your hospital
encourage you to report further?
10. Are you getting proper feedback to your reported reaction?
27
100
90
80
70
Yes
No
NR
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
FIGURE2: CHART SHOWING PERCENTAGE OF YES AND NO IN QUESTIONNAIRE
TABLE 2: Table shows factors that encouraged of discouraged doctors from reporting an
ADR.
FACTORS INFLUENCED
PERCENTAGE RESPONDERS
Encouraging: (n=20)
Creation of awareness amongst doctors
60
Provision of feedback on reported ADR
10
System is simple to operate
50
Acknowledging the receipt of the report
20
Discouraging: (n= 20)
Time consuming
60
28
Tedious
20
Well-known reactions
10
Mild adverse reactions
10
Immediate management of ADRs
20
DISCUSSION:
The overall results of the questionnaire survey were revealed that the doctors are aware of not
only the local hospital based ADR reporting and monitoring system exists at their respective
hospitals but also the national pharmacovigilance centre. Although there are several factors that
either encouraged or discouraged them to report an ADR, (00%) of doctors have reported the
suspected ADRs. This result suggests that ADR reporting rate may be enhanced through
appropriate campaigning and overcoming the existing barriers. However, it is possible that there
may be unnoticed adverse drug reactions. Unless the clinicians are trained to have a high index
of suspicion, it is difficult to consider it as a part of differential diagnosis. Other reasons quoted
for not reporting an ADR included no serious reactions observed, well-known reactions and
reactions were managed immediately. Similar reasons for not to report an ADR was reported in
one of the attitudinal survey study. This highlights the need for the encouraging medical
practitioners to report suspected ADRs and therefore there is a greater potential for the
pharmacists to increase the reporting rate of ADRs through creating awareness and educating the
medical practitioners about the importance of reporting of ADRs.
Our study strongly suggests that there is greater need to create awareness and to promote the
reporting of ADR among healthcare professionals of the country. Only such approach can greatly
influence in bringing reporting culture among healthcare professionals and may improve the
reporting rates of ADR in our country. Pharmacists, as doctors opined that their involvement
may increase the reporting rate, have a greater role to play in the area of pharmacovigilance.
29
REFERENCE:
1. Rapid Pharmacovigilance Implementations In Developing Countries (Responsible Scale
Up Of Treatment Programs Can Save Lives)(httpwww.rapidpharmacovigilance.org)
2. Lasser KE, Allen PD, Woolhandler SJ, Himmelstein DU, Wolfe SM, Bor DH. Timing of
new black box warning and withdrawals for prescription medications. JAMA 2002; 287:
2215-20.
3. Uppsala Monitoring Center.
4. The above quote and a lot of the above information is discussed in the new WHO report
“Promoting Safety of Medicines in Children, Sep 2007.
5. Pharmacovigilance Programme of India(httpcdsco.nic.inpharmacovigilance_intro.htm
6. Pharmacovigilance
Report
and
Analysis
April
2009
(VIS00119)
(httpwww.pharmaceutical-market -research. Compublications regulation _policy pharm
acovigilance_report_analysis_2009.html)
7. Grootheest AC van, Edwards IR. Labelling and ‘Dear Doctor’ letters: are the
noncommittal? Drug Saf 2002;25:1051-55.
8. Seligman PJ. ‘Dear Doctor…’- Evaluating the impact of risk communication
efforts.Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003; 12: 291-4.
9. Mann
R,
Andrews
E.
Pharmacovigilance.
Wiley
Chichester
2002.
(httpdissertations.ub.rug.nlfacultiesscience2003a.c.van.grootheest)
10. National Pharmacovigilance Program (Source: National Pharmacovigilance Protocol,
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of India (www.jipmer.edu)
11. CCox, AR., Marriott, JF., Wilson, KA.and Ferner, RE.Adverse drug reaction teaching in
UK undergraduate medical and pharmacy programmes.
Pharmacology,
2004;
10(4):
Journal of Clinical
29:31(dspace.mak.ac.ugbitstream...okalebo-moses-cit-
masters-report.pdf)
12. Yadav S. Status of adverse drug reaction monitoring and pharmacovigilance in selected
countries. Indian J Pharmacol 2008; 40: 4-9.(www.ijp-online.com)
13. Pharmacovigilance in the pharmaceutical industry; J C C Talbot and B S Nilsson; Br J
Clin Pharmacol; 1998 May; 45(5): 427–431.( httpwww.chillibreeze.com articles_ various
Pharmacovigilance.asp)
30
14. Food and Drug Administration. (1996). The clinical impact of adverse event reporting. A
MedWatch continuing education article, Retrieved November 26, 2005; from
http://www.fda.gov/medwatch/:
15. DOH. (1998). National Reporting System of Adverse Events in Taiwan. A journal of
public health, Jinhua St. , Taipei , 100, Taiwan: (pp 19-21)
16. World Health Organization.(2002). The importance of pharmacovigilance. International
conference on pharmacovigilance, Geneva.
17. How To Report Adverse Drug Reactions.Sited on(www.livestrong.com.mht)
18. ADR Form. (www.jipmer.educharu.pdf)
19. Central
Drugs
Standard
Control
Organization.
Available
from:
http://www.cdsco.gov.in.
20. Dahanukar SA, Thatte UM. Ayurveda revisited. 1
st
ed. Mumbai: Popular Prakashan
Private Ltd.; 1989.
21. Dahanukar SA, Thatte UM. Ayurveda unravelled. New Delhi: National Book Trust;
1996.
22. Ganesh Krishna Gadre, "13 th Adhyaya" Ashtang Hridaya. 2 nd ed. Pune: Aryabhushan
Printing Press; 1910; p. 65.
23. Available from: http://nccam.nih.gov/health/ayurveda/ (Last Accessed on 2007
September 7).
24. Thatte UM, Rege NN, Phatak S, Dahanukar SA. The flip side of ayurveda? J Postgrad
Med 1993; 39: 179-82.
25. Gogtay NJ, Bhatt HA, Dalvi SS, et al . The use and safety of non-allopathic Indian
medicines. Drug Saf 2002; 25: 1005-19.
26. Acharya Jadavji Trikramji, "8
th
Adhyaya" Charak Samhita. 5
th
ed. Varanasi:
Chaukhambha Sanskrit Sansthan; 2001; p. 275.
27. Acharya Jadavji Trikramji, editor. "8
th
Adhyaya" Charak Samhita. 5
th
ed. Varanasi:
Chaukhambha Sanskrit Sansthan; 2001; p. 276.
28. Pndit Kashinath Shastri, "2 nd Adhyaya" Rasantarangini. 11 th ed. Neaw Delhi: Sri
Jainendra Press; 1994; p. 22-4.
29. Saper RB, Kales SN, Paquin J, Burns MJ, Eisenberg DM, Davis RB, et al . Heavy metal
content of ayurvedic herbal medicine products. JAMA 2004; 292: 2868-73.
31
30. Parab S, Kulkarni RA, Thatte UM. Heavy metals in herbal medicines. Indian J
Gastroenterol 2003; 22: 111-2.
31. Acharya Jadavji Trikramji, "1
st
Adhyaya" Charak Samhita. 5
th
ed. Varanasi:
Chaukhambha Sanskrit Sansthan; 2001; p. 23.
32. Available from: http://indianmedicine.nic.in/html/edu/aemain.htm (Last Accessed on
2007 September 7).
33. Available from: http://indianmedicine.nic.in/html/ayurveda/asmain.htm (Last Accessed
on 2007 September 7).
34. Malik V, Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940, "4
th
Chapter", Part I, 14
th
ed. Lucknow:
Eastern Book Company; 2002; p. 37-44.
35. Dahanukar SA, Thatte UM. Can we prescribe ayurvedic drugs rationally? Indian Pract
1998; 51: 882-6.
36. Available
from:
http://indianmedicine.nic.in/html/manufactures/manufactuer.htm#ad
(Last Accessed on 2007 September 7).
37. Parab SM, Kalele SS, Verma S, Kulkarni RA, Shinde VJ, Bhalerao SS, et al . Safety
issues with medicines from alternative system of medicine. In: Proceedings of Workshop
on Pharmacovigilance: Promoting Drug Safety through Collaboration; 2003 December 56, Parel, Mumbai: Seth GS Medical College. p. 22.
38. Available from: http://indianmedicine.nic.in/html/pharma/apmain.htm (Last Accessed on
2007 September 7).
39. Available from: http://203.200.90.6/tkdl/LangDefault/common/Abouttkdl.asp?GL = Eng
(Last Accessed on 2007 September 7).
40. WHO guidelines on safety monitoring of herbal medicines in pharmacovigilance
systems, World Health Organization, Geneva, 2004
41. S Z Rahman & K C Singhal, Problems in pharmacovigilance of medicinal products of
herbal origin and means to minimize them, Uppsala Reports, WHO Collaborating Center
for ADR monitoring, Uppsala Monitoring Centre, Sweden, Issue 17 January 2002; 1-4
(Supplement)
42. Barnes J, Mills SY, Abbot NC, Willoughby M, Ernst E. Different standards for reporting
ADRs to herbal remedies and conventional OTC medicines: face-to-face interviews with
32
515 users of herbal remedies. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 1998; 45(5):
496-500.
43. Ang-Lee MK, Moss J, Yuan C. Herbal medicines and perioperative care. Journal of the
American Medical Association 2001; 286: 208-216.
44. Guidelines for the assessment of herbal medicines, WHO/TRM/91.4, WHO Geneva,1991
45. Guidelines
for
safety
monitoring
of
herbal
preparations
are
under
development.(apps.who.int)
46. Winslow LC, Kroll DJ, Herbs as medicines, Archives of Internal Medicine,158, 1998;
2192-2199 (www.ijpsr.com)
47. Gossell M, Simon OR, West ME, The past and the present use of plants for medicines,
West Indian Medical Journal, 55, 2006; 217.( www.ijpsr.com )
48. De-Smet PGAM, The role of plant derived drugs and herbal medicines in health care,
Drugs, 54, 1997; 801-840.
49. WHO technical report series, Guidelines for the assessment of herbal medicines, 863,
1996; 178-184.
50. Kuhn MA, Herbal remedies: drug-herb interactions, Critical Care Nurse, 22, 2002; 22-32.
51. Routledge P, 150 years of pharmacovigilance, The Lancet, 351, 1998; 1200-1201
52. Bigoniya P, Pharmacovigilance of herbal medicines: current status and future strategies,
The Pharma Review, 5, 2009; 77-88.
53. Chan TYK, Monitoring the safety of herbal medicines, Drug Safety, 17, 1997; 209-215.
54. Sukhdev S, Arun N, Kalia AN, Patentability of herbal products: a review, The Pharma
Review, 4, 2008; 118-124.
55. Raskin L, Ribnicky DN, Komarnytsky S, Lic N, Poulev A, Borisjuk N, Plants and human
health in the twenty first century, Trends in Biotechnology, 20(12), 2002; 522-531.
56. Mukherjee PK, Exploring botanicals in Indian systems of medicine regulatory
perspectives, Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs, 20, 2003; 249-264.
57. Calixto JB, Efficacy, safety, quality control, marketing, and regulatory guidelines for
herbal medicines, Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 33, 2000, 179189.
58. WHO, “The Importance of Pharmacovigilance, 2002”(www.fip.org)
33
59. Brouwers JRBJ, Roon EN van, Toering DJ. De ziekenhuisapotheker als farmacotherapeut
[The clinical pharmacist as pharmacotherapist]. Pharm Weekbl 2003; 138: 692-6
60. Clause S, Fudin J, Mergner A, Lutz JL, Davanaugh MM, Fessler K, Chirumamilla
S.Prescibing privileges among pharmacists in Veterans Affairs medical centres. Am J
Healt-SystPharm; 58: 1143-5.
61. Grootheest AC van, Puijenbroek EP van, Jong – van den Berg LTW de. Pharmacists’ role
in reporting adverse drug reactions in an international perspective. Pharmacoepidemiol
Drug Saf(in press).
62. Poston J, Parish P. The pharmacists. In: Monitoring for drug safety (WHW Inman,
editor). MTP Press.Lancaster 1986.
63. Major E. The yellow card scheme and the role of pharmacists as reporters. Pharm J 2002;
269: 25-6.
64. . Olsson S. National Pharmacovigilance Systems – Country Profiles and Overview
(second edition). Uppsala Monitoring Centre. Uppsala 1999.
65. Kelly B. Pharmacovigilance: more a responsibility than a role. Austr Pharm 2001;20:128
66. Anonymus. Top-priority actions for preventing adverse drug events in hospitals.
Recommendations of a expert panel. Am J Health-Syst Pharm 1996; 53: 747-751.
67. Leape LL, Cullen DJ, Dempsey Clapp M, Burdick E, Demonaco HJ, Erickson JI, Bates
DW. Pharmacist Participation on Physician Rounds and Adverse Drug Events in the
Intensive Care Unit. JAMA 1999; 282: 267-70.
68. Bemt PMLA van de. Drug Safety in Hospitalised Patients. Thesis Rijksuniversiteit
Groningen.Groningen 2002.
69. Major E. The yellow card scheme and the role of pharmacists as reporters. Pharm J 2002;
269: 25-6.
70. Ahmad SR, Freiman JP, Graham DJ, Nelson RC. Quality of Adverse Drug Experience
Reports Submitted by Pharmacists and Physicians to the FDA. Pharmacoepidem Drug
Saf 1996; 5: 1-7.
34
35