Maza LJA, Aguilar ALM, Mendoza BJA

Language: Spanish
References: 22
Page: 47-53
PDF size: 186.57 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Although awareness of the correct use of substances used for the treatment of different diseases has the same Hippocratic principle of: «first do no harm», this was not made concrete as an ex-professed activity for the monitoring of its effects, which in recent times is called pharmacovigilance. Pharmacovigilance activities were prompted by major serious adverse reactions to drugs that were warning signs that, while they are intended to improve health status, they also have the potential to be harmful in significant, even fatal, ways. Pharmacovigilance activities, as a global effort, aim to improve the safety of medicines by monitoring post-marketing adverse reactions in the open population. With the historical development of medical science, it has also become evident the need to implement mechanisms to reduce the potential for human error, as well as to identify and manage the risks and problems related to medicines; it has also been important to promote a reporting culture in order to warn of the problem, analyze its causality, and with everybody’s effort, establish mechanisms that improve the safety profile of the nations’ medication system. Mexico, as an important actor in global decision-making, has not remained isolated in the face of this scenario, and joins the efforts of the health authorities themselves in taking important steps, implementing actions that go from the regulatory sphere, and have permeated the entire health sector of our country. Faced with this hopeful scenario, it would be irresponsible to lower our guard; on the contrary, we must redouble our efforts to implement a pharmacovigilance programme. These efforts do not escape us, and that with the creation of the Hospital Pharmacovigilance Unit of the Central Military Hospital in 2014, our institution is consistent with the vision of quality and health safety.

REFERENCES

1. Castillo ML. Conocimiento de la farmacovigilancia y reporte de reacciones adversas institucional. [Tesis para obtener el Posgrado en Especialista en Medicina Familiar]. Poza Rica, Veracruz: Instituto Mexicano de Seguro Social, Unidad Médica Familiar Núm. 73; 2014.

2. Bootman JL, Harrison DL. Pharmacoeconomics and therapeutic drug monitoring. Pharm World Sci. 1997; 19 (4): 178-181.

3. World Health Organization. Why health professionals need to take action. Safety of medicines –A guide to detecting and reporting of adverse drug reactions. Geneva: WHO; 2002.

4. González JC, Einarson TR. Encuesta sobre programas de farmacovigilancia en Latinoamérica. Pharmaceutical Care España. 2006; 8 (3): 96-146.

5. Fonseca-Lazcano JA, Rivero-Sigarroa E, Baltazar-Torres JA, Ñamendys-Silva SA, Domínguez-Cherrit G. Auditoría médica. Med Int Mex. 2009; 25 (1): 23-30.

6. Kahn U, Kreutzer S, Gill J, Taylor D. Falsified medicines and the global public’s health. Report of Matrix Insight and UCL School of Pharmacy, 2012.

7. Medication Without Harm —Global Patient Safety Challenge on Medication Safety. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2017.

8. Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-220-SSA1-2012, Instalación y operación de la farmacovigilancia.

9. Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-220-SSA1-2016, Instalación y operación de la farmacovigilancia.

10. World Health Organization. Quality Assurance and Safety of Medicines Team. The safety of medicines in public health programmes: pharmacovigilance, an essential tool. Geneva: World Health Organization; ‎2006.

11. World Health Organization. Safety monitoring of medicinal products, guidelines for setting up and running a pharmacovigilance center. Uppsala: Uppsala Monitoring Centre, World Health Organization; 2000.

12. Varallo FR, Guimarães Sde O, Abjaude SA, Mastroianni Pde C. Causes for the underreporting of adverse drug events by health professionals: a systematic review. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2014; 48 (4): 739-747.

13. Zolezzi M, Parsotam N. Adverse drug reaction reporting in New Zealand: implications for pharmacists. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2005; 1 (3): 181-188.

14. Lundin T. Postive trends for VigiBase: 12 million reports & counting. Uppsala Rep. 2016; 72: 14-15.

15. Pearson BR. Under-reporting of adverse drug reactions: the need for an automated reporting system. Interdisciplinary Journal of Health Sciences. 2013; 3 (1): 15-20.

16. Mazariegos-Barahona OA. Seguimiento del Programa de Farmacovigilancia del Hospital Roosevelt en el Departamento de Estomatología. [Informe de tesis para optar al título de Química Farmacéutica]. Guatemala: Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala, Faculta de Ciencias Químicas y Farmacia; 2011.

17. Base de datos CNFV, consultada el 7 de diciembre del 2015.

18. Cofepris; Farmacovigilancia y Tecnovigilancia. 7.° Boletín Informativo, Fomento para la notificación de sospecha de reacciones adversas en medicamentos, vacunas y dispositivos médicos. Secretaría de Salud, Comisión Federal para la Protección Contra el Riesgo Sanitario.

19. Alcántara-Acevedo LG. Aplicación de algoritmos estandarizados internacionalmente para evaluar notificaciones espontáneas de sospecha de reacción adversa en el CNFV del año 2010. [Tesis experimental]. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Facultad de Estudios Superiores Zaragoza, Química Farmacéutico Biológica; 2010.

20. Morales-Ríos O, Jasso-Gutiérrez L, Garduño-Espinosa J, Olivar-López V, Muñoz-Hernández O. Do pediatricians identify adverse drug reactions even when they do not report them? Bol Med Hosp Infant Mex. 2015; 72 (2): 106-111.

21. Organización Panamericana de la Salud. Buenas prácticas de farmacovigilancia para las Américas. Documento para la opinión pública. Versión 5. Nov 2008.

22. Consejo de Salubridad General. Modelo de seguridad del paciente del Consejo de Salubridad General. Estándares para el modelo en hospitales. 3.a edición. México: CSG; 2015.