Pharmacotherapy follow‐up: Role in active malaria surveillance in a travel medicine centre outside the transmission area in Brazil. (13th June 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Pedro, R. S.; Brasil, P.; Pina‐Costa, A.; Machado, C. R.; Damasceno, L. S.; Daniel‐Ribeiro, C. T.; Guaraldo, L.
• Is Part Of: Journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics. Volume 42:Number 6(2017)
• Page Start: 750
• Page End: 757
• Publication Date: 2017-06-13
• Subjects: antimalarial drugs -- malaria -- malaria surveillance -- pharmacotherapy follow‐up -- pharmacovigilance; Clinical pharmacology -- Periodicals; Chemotherapy -- Periodicals; 615
• DOI: 10.1111/jcpt.12575
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0269-4727

Abstract

Summary: What is known and objective: Malaria is a potentially severe disease, widespread in tropical and subtropical areas. Apart from parasite drug resistance, which receives the largest share of attention, several factors directly influence the response to antimalarial treatment such as incorrect doses, adverse drug events, lack of adherence to treatment, drug quality and drug‐drug interactions. Pharmacotherapy follow‐up can be used to monitor and improve the effectiveness of treatment, prevent drug‐related problems and ensure patient safety. The aim of this study was to describe the results of the implementation of pharmacotherapy follow‐up of patients with malaria seen at a reference centre for malaria diagnosis and treatment (CPD‐Mal) located in the city of Rio de Janeiro, an area without malaria transmission. Methods: A descriptive study was conducted from January 2009 to September 2013 at the Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas (INI) of the Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz). All malaria patients enrolled in the study were treated according to the Brazilian Malaria Therapy Guidelines. Data collected during pharmacotherapy follow‐up were recorded in a standardized form. The variables included were age, gender, comorbidities, antimalarials and concomitant medications used, adverse drug reactions (ADR), clinical and parasitological cure times, and treatment outcomes classified as success, recurrence (recrudescence or relapse); and lost to follow‐up. The ADR were classified by severity (DAIDS‐NIH), organ system affected (WHO‐ART) and likelihood to be caused by drugs (Naranjo scale). Results and discussion: One hundred thirteen cases of malaria were included. Patients were aged between 13 and 66 years and the majority of them (75.2%) were male. Ninety‐four ADR were observed, most classified as mild (85.1%), related to disorders of the gastrointestinal system (63.8%), such as nausea and vomiting, and assessed as "possibly" caused by the antimalarial drugs (91.5%). The majority of clinical (90.9%) and parasitological (87.1%) cure occurred less than 72 hours after treatment initiation. Pharmacotherapy follow‐up of malaria treatment by surveillance activities is therefore important regarding information about treatment outcomes as well as patient safety, resulting in better patient care and reducing the chance of relapses. The results underscore its use as a tool for monitoring adherence and drug resistance outside an endemic area. What is new and conclusion: Pharmacotherapy follow‐up should be considered a useful malaria surveillance tool that can be developed by reference centres for comprehensive health care assistance and monitoring of therapeutic resistance. Abstract : Pharmacotherapy follow‐up should be considered a useful malaria surveillance tool that can be developed by reference centres for comprehensive health care assistance and monitoring of therapeutic resistance.