» Articles » PMID: 29105853

Measuring the Impact of Medicines Regulatory Interventions - Systematic Review and Methodological Considerations

Overview
Specialty Pharmacology
Date 2017 Nov 7
PMID 29105853
Citations 35
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Aims: Evaluating the public health impact of regulatory interventions is important but there is currently no common methodological approach to guide this evaluation. This systematic review provides a descriptive overview of the analytical methods for impact research.

Methods: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for articles with an empirical analysis evaluating the impact of European Union or non-European Union regulatory actions to safeguard public health published until March 2017. References from systematic reviews and articles from other known sources were added. Regulatory interventions, data sources, outcomes of interest, methodology and key findings were extracted.

Results: From 1246 screened articles, 229 were eligible for full-text review and 153 articles in English language were included in the descriptive analysis. Over a third of articles studied analgesics and antidepressants. Interventions most frequently evaluated are regulatory safety communications (28.8%), black box warnings (23.5%) and direct healthcare professional communications (10.5%); 55% of studies measured changes in drug utilization patterns, 27% evaluated health outcomes, and 18% targeted knowledge, behaviour or changes in clinical practice. Unintended consequences like switching therapies or spill-over effects were rarely evaluated. Two-thirds used before-after time series and 15.7% before-after cross-sectional study designs. Various analytical approaches were applied including interrupted time series regression (31.4%), simple descriptive analysis (28.8%) and descriptive analysis with significance tests (23.5%).

Conclusion: Whilst impact evaluation of pharmacovigilance and product-specific regulatory interventions is increasing, the marked heterogeneity in study conduct and reporting highlights the need for scientific guidance to ensure robust methodologies are applied and systematic dissemination of results occurs.

Citing Articles

Using Mixed Methods to Evaluate Risk Minimisation Programs in Europe and the USA: An Innovative Blueprint.

Smith M, Davis R, Bahri P, Saragoussi D, Nguyen V, Toyserkani G Drug Saf. 2025; .

PMID: 40075031 DOI: 10.1007/s40264-025-01533-w.


WHO-listed authorities (WLA) framework: transparent evidence-based approach for promoting regulatory reliance towards increased access to quality-assured medical products.

Broojerdi A, Salvati A, Abdelfattah M, Dehaghi R, Sillo H, Gaspar R Front Med (Lausanne). 2024; 11:1467229.

PMID: 39376648 PMC: 11456560. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1467229.


The STAR Compass to Guide Future Pharmacovigilance Based on a 10-Year Review of the Strengthened EU System.

Bahri P, Genov G, Arlett P, Sarinic V, Korakianiti E, Nolte A Drug Saf. 2024; 47(10):941-956.

PMID: 38987419 PMC: 11399220. DOI: 10.1007/s40264-024-01451-3.


Evolution of the profiles of new psychotropic drug users before and during the COVID-19 crisis: an original longitudinal approach through multichannel sequence analysis using the French health-care database.

Istvan M, Duval M, Hodel K, Aquizerate A, Chaslerie A, Artarit P Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2024; .

PMID: 38499795 DOI: 10.1007/s00406-024-01774-3.


Proceedings of the International Ambulatory Drug Safety Symposium: Munich, Germany, June 2023.

Alexander G, Budnitz D, Hughes C, Maas R, Mair A, McDonald E Drug Saf. 2023; 47(1):103-111.

PMID: 37917316 DOI: 10.1007/s40264-023-01362-9.


References
1.
Donohoe E, Walsh N, Tracey J . Pack-size legislation reduces severity of paracetamol overdoses in Ireland. Ir J Med Sci. 2006; 175(3):40-2. DOI: 10.1007/BF03169171. View

2.
Kimura T, Shiosakai K, Takeda Y, Takahashi S, Kobayashi M, Sakaguchi M . Quantitative Evaluation of Compliance with Recommendation for Sulfonylurea Dose Co-Administered with DPP-4 Inhibitors in Japan. Pharmaceutics. 2013; 4(3):479-93. PMC: 3834918. DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics4030479. View

3.
Metcalfe C, Wheeler B, Gunnell D, Martin R . International regulatory activity restricting COX-2 inhibitor use and deaths due to gastrointestinal haemorrhage and myocardial infarction. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2010; 19(8):778-85. DOI: 10.1002/pds.1957. View

4.
Enger C, Younus M, Petronis K, Mo J, Gately R, Seeger J . The effectiveness of varenicline medication guide for conveying safety information to patients: a REMS assessment survey. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2013; 22(7):705-15. DOI: 10.1002/pds.3400. View

5.
Hawton K, Bergen H, Simkin S, Wells C, Kapur N, Gunnell D . Six-year follow-up of impact of co-proxamol withdrawal in England and Wales on prescribing and deaths: time-series study. PLoS Med. 2012; 9(5):e1001213. PMC: 3348153. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001213. View