Based on the assumption that minor symptoms may presage serious events, we report four years' experience with a web-based adverse event (AE) tracking system (eAETS) designed to capture AEs of a minor nature that would not meet criteria for ethical review. The eAETS has supported 175 diverse clinical protocols, is user-friendly and navigationally intuitive, and restricts access based on protocol ownership. The user creates an initial risk profile for comparison to subsequent AEs to identify unanticipated patterns. Out of 2,440 AE reports, 1,053 did not match the risk profile. Corrective modification was recommended in 6 (13%) protocols. The eAETS provides a framework for weighing the impact of AEs on subject safety.
AndrewsL. B.StockingC.KrizekT.GottliebL.KrizekC.VargishT.. (1997). An alternative strategy for studying adverse events in medical care. Lancet, 349(9048), 309–313.
BarachP. & KellyM. J. (2000). Medical errors and patient safety in Massachusetts: What is the role of the Commonwealth?Issue Brief (Mass Health Policy Forum) (10), 1–32.
4.
CraddickJ. W. (1987). Improving quality and resource management through medical analysis. Rockville, MD: Medical Management Analysis International Inc.
5.
CullenD. J.BatesD. W.SmallS. D.CooperJ. B.NemeskalA. R. & LeapeL. L. (1995). The incident reporting system does not detect adverse drug events: A problem for quality improvement. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality Improvement, 21(10), 541–548.
6.
DavidsonK. W.KahnA. & PriceR. D. (1987). Reduction of adverse drug reactions by computerized drug interaction screening. The Journal of Family Practice, 25(4), 371–375.
7.
GreenlawC. W. & ZellersD. D. (1978). Computerized drug-drug interaction screening system. American journal of hospital pharmacy, 35(5), 567–570.
8.
HulseR. K.ClarkS. J.JacksonJ. C.WarnerH. R. & GardnerR. M. (1976). Computerized medication monitoring system. American Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, 33(10), 1061–1064.
9.
KivlahanC.SangsterW.NelsonK.BuddenbaumJ. & LobensteinK. (2002). Developing a comprehensive electronic adverse event reporting system in an academic health center. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality Improvement, 28(11), 583–594.
10.
LeapeL. L. (1997). A systems analysis approach to medical error. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 3(3), 213–222.
11.
LeapeL. L. (2002). Reporting of adverse events. New England Journal of Medicine, 347(20), 1633–1638.
12.
LevineR. L. (2006). Empirical research to evaluate ethics committees' burdensome and, perhaps, unproductive policies and practices: A proposal. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 1(3), 1–4.
13.
MekhjianH. S.BentleyT. D.AhmadA. & MarshG. (2004). Development of a web-based event reporting system in an academic environment. Journal of American Medical Informatics Association, 11(1), 11–18.
14.
StanhopeN.Crowley-MurphyM.VincentC.O'ConnorA. M. & Taylor-AdamsS. E. (1999). An evaluation of adverse incident reporting. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 5(1), 5–12.
15.
SteinbrookR. (2002). Improving protection for research subjects. New England Journal of Medicine, 346(18), 1425–1430.
16.
SteinbrookR. (2002). Protecting research subjects—the crisis at Johns Hopkins. New England Journal of Medicine, 346(9), 716–720.
17.
TatroD. S.BriggsR. L.Chavez-PardoR.FeinbergL. S.HanniganJ. F.MooreT. N.. (1975). Detection and prevention of drug interactions utilizing an on-line computer system. Drug Information Journal, 9(1), 10–17.
18.
VermaI. M. (2001). Adverse event reporting: Essential for science and public trust. Molecular Therapy, 4(2), 83.
19.
WingetM.KincaidH.LinP.LiL.KellyS. & ThornquistM. (2005). A web-based system for managing and co-ordinating multiple multisite studies. Clinical Trials, 2(1), 42–49.
20.
WisniewskiS. R.EngH.MeloroL.GattR.RitzL.StegmanD.. (2004). Web-based communications and management of a multi-center clinical trial: The Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) project. Clinical Trials, 1(4), 387–398.
