Skip to main content
Download PDF

Variation of adverse drug events in different settings in Africa: a systematic review

European Journal of Medical Research volume 29, Article number: 333 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Adverse drug events (ADEs) represent challenges affecting Africa’s healthcare systems owing to the increased healthcare expenditure and negative health outcomes of ADEs.

Objectives

We aimed to systematically review published studies on ADEs and synthesize the existing evidence of ADE prevalence in Africa.

Methods

Studies reporting on ADE occurrence in African settings and published from Jan 1, 2000 to Oct 1, 2023 were identified by searching PubMed, EBSCO, Science Direct, and Web of Science. Studies that either articulately investigated ADEs caused by clinical condition (such as HIV patients) or ADEs caused by exposure to specific drug(s) (such as antibiotics) were considered specific and the remaining were general. Grouped ADE prevalence rates were described using median and interquartile range (IQR). PROSPERO registration (CRD42022374095).

Results

We included 78 observational studies from 15 African countries that investigated the prevalence of ADEs leading to hospital admissions (17 studies), developed during hospitalizations (30 studies), and captured in the outpatient departments (38 studies) or communities (4 studies). Twelve studies included multiple settings. The median prevalence of ADE during hospitalization was 7.8% (IQR: 4.2–21.4%) and 74.2% (IQR: 54.1–90.7%) in general and specific patients, respectively. The ADE-related fatality rate was 0.1% and 1.3% in general and specific patients. The overall median prevalence of ADEs leading to hospital admissions was 6.0% (IQR: 1.5–9.0%); in general, patients and the median prevalence of ADEs in the outpatient and community settings were 22.9% (IQR: 14.6–56.1%) and 32.6% (IQR: 26.0–41.3%), respectively, with a median of 43.5% (IQR: 16.3–59.0%) and 12.4% (IQR: 7.1–28.1%) of ADEs being preventable in general and specific patients, respectively.

Conclusions

The prevalence of ADEs was significant in both hospital and community settings in Africa. A high ADE prevalence was observed in specific patients, emphasizing important areas for improvement, particularly in at-risk patient groups (e.g., pediatrics, HIV, and TB patients) in various settings. Due to limited studies conducted in the community setting, future research in this setting is encouraged.

Introduction

Patient safety ranks among the most paramount priorities of healthcare professionals. Nevertheless, there are still substantial challenges to assure patients their safety allowing for the increasing complexities of healthcare delivery [1, 2]. Despite advances in healthcare, ADEs result in an upsurge in morbidity and mortality [3], such as extended hospital stays, and increased healthcare expenditures [4], particularly for the elderly and children [5, 6], thereby exerting significant burden on patients' recovery and healthcare systems.

According to a 2018 systematic review, including 18 hospital-based studies, ADEs significantly caused morbidities in African hospitals, with 8.4% inpatients encountering ADEs during hospitalization and 2.8% owing to ADEs causing hospital admissions, of which 43.5% of these ADEs were assessed preventable [7]. The prevention of ADEs in Africa can be achieved when patients who receive drugs are continuously monitored through collaborative efforts among healthcare teams, medication therapy management, and competent pharmacovigilance systems, which are the main bones in ensuring patient safety [8, 9]. Assessing the occurrence of ADEs in the outpatient or community settings to complement evidence in the hospital settings may help prioritize healthcare areas that need improvement, which in turn could assist in targeted quality improvement programs. There is a sparse amount of evidence offering a comprehensive assessment of the burden of ADEs occurring in the outpatient or community settings in Africa. There have been two systematic reviews carried out in Africa [7, 10], but these reviews had a focus on hospital settings without inclusion of community settings and adverse reactions induced by specific pharmaceutical interventions (e.g., antiretroviral therapy). The exclusion of outpatient and community settings suggest that previous studies provided an incomprehensive insight into the true burden of ADRs in Africa. This, limited insight, presents a drawback in making comprehensive policy and informed decisions to implement effective strategies for improved medication safety in Africa.

This systematic review aimed to comprehensively characterize the prevalence, preventability, seriousness or severity, and mortality of ADEs occurring in the inpatient, outpatient, and community settings in Africa, with such evidence to inform better clinical decision-making to enhance the safer use of medicines.

Methods

Terminology

Adverse drug events (ADEs) are unintentional injuries resulting from exposure to a medication that encapsulates adverse events [11]. Adverse drug reactions are noxious and undesired responses to medications at normal doses [12]. Study populations included in this review were grouped into two different types of population groups, i.e., general patient groups (i.e., ADEs occurring in all patients treated within a certain healthcare setting) and specific patient groups (i.e., ADEs caused by clinical condition (such as HIV patients) or ADEs caused by exposure to specific drug(s) (such as antibiotics). Community settings referred to care delivered outside a hospital inpatient or a clinic setting. Outpatient settings referred to care delivered within healthcare facilities catering to a wide range of non-urgent medical conditions. Prevalence was defined as the proportion of patients with ADE(s) within a defined patient group. Serious ADEs referred to those resulted in hospital admissions or prolonged stay during an existing hospitalization, persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or even death [13], while severe ADEs included those that were potentially life-threatening, prolonged hospitalization and caused permanent disability or fatal. Preventable ADEs referred to primarily those caused by medication errors that could generally be avoided.

Search strategy and data source

We report the findings of this review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines [14]. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022374095). Our search began on Jan 1, 2022, and on Oct 15, 2023, a new search was conducted for updates. Studies published from Jan 1, 2000 to Oct 1, 2023 were identified by searching four electronic databases: PubMed, EBSCO, Science Direct, and Web of Science. The search query was a combination of Boolean Operators (AND and OR) and terms related to ADEs, settings of interest, and African countries. A detailed search strategy is provided in Additional file 1. In addition, we hand searched the references list of included studies and citations to retrieve relevant studies. Endnote X7 was used to organize the final search results (Thomson Reuters, Times Square New York, NY, USA) and duplicates were removed.

Eligibility criteria

The inclusion criteria comprised of the following, i.e., observational studies that investigated the prevalence [proportion of patients with ADE(s) within a defined patient group] and/or nature (e.g., preventability and fatality) of ADEs in any patient population of all ages who were hospitalized as a result of ADEs, had developed ADE during hospitalization, or experienced ADE in the outpatient or community settings, including retrospective, prospective and cross-sectional studies; studies on adverse events were only included if injuries caused by drugs were recorded; studies conducted in an African setting; and studies that either specifically investigated ADEs associated with clinical condition(s) or exposure to specific drug(s). There was no age or disease limit in the current study selection. Studies were excluded based on the following criteria, i.e., Non-English language and non-African settings; lack of full-text availability; conference abstracts, case control studies, commentaries, or reviews; knowledge and attitudes about ADE reporting.

Selection process

The article titles and abstracts were independently screened by two reviewers (LN and YH) to determine the relevance to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. After initial screening, the full-text of potentially relevant papers identified were further screened by two reviewers (LN and YH). The eligibility criteria outlined above were used to determine the full-text retrieval analysis of studies. When necessary, two reviewers were engaged for additional clarity on any points of contention. Differences in opinions was resolved by a third reviewer (HX).

Data extraction

Two reviewers independently extracted data from the included studies and entered them into a data-collecting form. Study characteristics, e.g., author name, year, country, data source and duration, study design, study setting, ADE definition, population characteristics, identification of ADEs in terms of detection method, causality, seriousness or severity, fatality, preventability of ADEs, and prevalence of ADEs, were extracted from the selected studies.

Quality assessment

Two reviewers assessed the methodological quality of included observational studies using the ten-question criteria proposed by Smyth et al. [15], considering that the widely used risk assessment approaches for systematic review such as Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and GRADE were primarily appropriate for randomized controlled trials. This ten-point quality assessment instrument employed in the current review was developed specifically for studies investigating ADEs in clinical settings and has been applied by previous systematic reviews [7, 10, 16, 17]. We replaced the term severity with “seriousness or severity” in Smyth et al.’s. assessment criteria [15]. Any remaining inconsistencies were referred to and resolved by a third reviewer. The following characteristics were assessed from included studies; study designs, methods for detecting ADEs, techniques for establishing the causal relationship between drug exposures and consequential events, and tools for assessing the preventability and seriousness or severity of ADEs. Out of the ten questions, the total number of "yes" answers was used to compute the quality score for each study. Research studies were assigned a score of ≥ 7 for low risk of bias and ≤ 7 for high risk of bias.

Data analysis

Studies used different methods to report the occurrence of ADEs; however, we solely extracted prevalence estimates to ensure that the outcome measure was comparable. ADE prevalence was calculated for each study by extracting the total number of patients who experienced at least one ADE as the numerator and the total number of patients in the study population as the denominator. The prevalence of ADEs was described as a percentage of patients with an ADE. We also calculated the medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs) of ADE prevalence across the included studies. Studies were separated into two different at-risk populations, i.e., those targeting general patients (such as medical ward patients, including patients being treated for a specific disease who might have developed ADEs for medication received for something else) and specific patients (studies that either investigated ADEs caused by clinical condition (such as HIV patients) or ADEs caused by exposure to specific drug(s) (such as antibiotics), and therefore, the results, for example, the proportion of ADEs leading to hospital admissions, ADE prevalence during hospitalization, ADE prevalence in the outpatient, and community setting, were reported for these two different at-risk populations, respectively. A similar approach was followed for the seriousness or severity of ADEs, ADE-related fatality, and preventability of ADEs. Since the included studies were heterogeneous, therefore, we did not carry out a meta-analysis.

Results

Search results

There were 1407 articles yielded after removing duplicates. Two hundred and forty-three articles qualified for full-text review. A total of 78 articles were found to be suitable for inclusion in the review (Fig. 1). The 78 articles (Tables 1 and 2) included in the analysis were pooled from 15 African countries, i.e., Ethiopia (22), South Africa (11), Nigeria (12), Morocco (4), Cameroon (4), Uganda (10), Mali (2), Kenya (3), Tunisia (1), Ghana (2), Eritrea (2), Malawi (1), Zimbabwe (1), Tanzania (1), and Namibia (2). Detailed characteristics of ADEs studies carried out on general and specific patient Cohorts can be found in Additional file 2: Tables S1 and S2.

Fig. 1
figure 1

PRISMA flowchart of the study selection process

Full size image
Table 1 Characteristics of adverse drug events studies carried out on general patient cohorts
Full size table
Table 2 Characteristics of adverse drug events studies carried out on specific patient cohorts
Full size table

Characteristics of studies

A total of 78 studies investigating ADEs were included in this study (89,899 patients excluding mutual patients from two studies). Study populations were divided into general and specific patient cohorts. Of 78 studies, 27 studies [18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44] were carried out among general patients, while the remaining studies [45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95] were carried out among specific patients. Seventeen studies [18,19,20,21,22, 24, 26, 31, 33,34,35, 38, 39, 41,42,43, 51] reported the prevalence of ADEs leading to hospital admissions, while 30 studies [18, 19, 22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33, 35, 37,38,39,40,41, 43, 44, 65, 80, 85,86,87,88, 91, 95] reported the prevalence of ADEs during hospitalization. Twelve studies [18, 19, 22, 24, 26, 31, 33, 35, 38, 39, 41, 43] reported ADE occurrence in both settings. In addition, 38 studies [45,46,47,48,49,50, 52, 54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64, 66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74, 76, 78, 79, 82,83,84, 89, 90, 92,93,94] reported the occurrence of ADEs in the outpatient setting, and four studies [53, 75, 77, 81] reported ADEs in the community setting. Majority of included studies [18,19,20,21,22, 27,28,29, 32,33,34, 36, 37, 40, 41, 43, 45,46,47,48, 52, 54,55,56,57,58,59,60, 62,63,64,65, 67, 70, 72,73,74, 76, 79, 81, 82, 89, 90, 92,93,94] were carried out on adult population (aged ≥ 18 years) (n = 46), while 18 studies were conducted among all age groups (aged 0–100 years) [23, 24, 30, 50, 51, 61, 66, 68, 69, 71, 75, 77, 78, 84,85,86,87,88], 12 studies [25, 26, 31, 35, 38, 39, 49, 53, 80, 83, 91, 95] among pediatrics (aged < 18 years) and two studies [42, 44] assessed ADEs in the elderly population (> 65 years).

Thirty-one of the studies were conducted prospectively, while the remaining (n = 43) were conducted in a retrospective or cross-sectional manner. Four studies, however, used both retrospective and prospective [39, 63], cross-sectional and analytical study [54] designs and mixed study designs [74]. About 70% of the included studies were carried out at a single healthcare center, while the remaining (30%) were carried out at multi-centers and community settings.

Quality assessment of studies

All the studies sufficiently described their study design. ADEs were detected in these studies using a variety of approaches, including medical records review as specified by majority of the studies. A variety of ADE confirmation procedures were utilized in the studies, including clinical examination, clinical rounds, patient/caregiver/ward staff interviews, laboratory data review, nursing record review, prescription chart review, and voluntary reporting. Details regarding healthcare professionals engaged in the detection of ADEs were reported in majority of the studies. The process of establishing the causal relationship, preventability, and seriousness or severity were poorly described in the studies. In addition, tools employed in the assessment of causality, preventability, and seriousness or severity were highlighted in 50% of the studies, 28% of the studies, and 53% of the studies, respectively (Table 3). The quality assessment of included studies ranged from 1 to 10 points with a median quality score of 6 (IQR: 4–8) across the 78 studies (Additional file 3: Tables S1 and S2). Thirty-two studies were rated as low risk of bias (scored ≥ 7), while 46 studies were rated as high risk of bias (scored ≤ 7).

Table 3 Assessment of methodological quality of included studies (Smyth et al. adapted criteria)
Full size table

Studies with a focus on general patient cohorts

There was a total of 27 studies with 22,093 participants involved in the studies (excluding mutual patients from Angamo et al. [20, 21] and Mouton et al. [34, 36] studies). The proportion of females included in the study ranged from 70 to 100%. Six studies [25, 26, 31, 35, 38, 39] were conducted among pediatric patients, two studies [42, 44] on elderly patients, and one study [32] on an all-female population. These 27 studies with a focus on general patient groups were carried out in 6 African countries; Nigeria (4), Morocco (3), Uganda (4), South Africa (8), Tunisia (1), and Ethiopia (7). Twenty-two studies [18,19,20,21,22, 24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33, 35, 38,39,40,41,42, 44] were carried out at a single center, while five studies [23, 34, 36, 37, 43] were conducted at a multi-center. There was a total of 15 studies [18, 21, 23, 25,26,27,28,29, 31, 33, 38, 40,41,42, 44] that were conducted prospectively, five studies [19, 24, 30, 32, 37] used a retrospective approach; whereas the remaining studies used a cross-sectional study design [20, 22, 34,35,36, 43]. Oshikoya et al.’s [39] study used both retrospective and prospective study designs. The majority of included studies were carried out among patients admitted to medical wards. The WHO definition for ADRs was frequently used in the included studies [18,19,20,21,22, 29, 31, 33, 39, 43]. The majority of included studies used medical record review [18,19,20,21,22, 25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41, 43, 44] for the detection of ADEs. Twenty-five studies reported on causality assessment, with the Naranjo and WHO-UMC methods frequently referenced. Seriousness or severity of ADEs were assessed in a total of 22 studies, using Temple tools in four studies and other tools in 17 studies. However, the tool employed in the assessment of seriousness or severity of ADEs was not provided in one study [18]. Twenty-three studies conducted an assessment on the preventability of ADEs with Schumock and Thornton criteria employed in the majority of the studies. However, tools employed in ADE preventability assessment were not provided in five studies [18, 23, 25, 31, 39]. We found no studies conducted in the general patient populations reporting the prevalence of ADEs in the outpatient or community settings.

Seventeen studies [18,19,20,21,22, 24, 26, 31, 33,34,35,36, 38, 39, 41,42,43] reported on the prevalence of ADEs leading to hospital admissions ranging from 0.4% to 50% of all study populations; however, data were available for 16 studies. The overall median ADE prevalence among the 16 studies was 6.0% (IQR: 1.5%–9.0%) of all study populations (Table 4).

Table 4 Adverse drug event results in general patient cohorts
Full size table

The prevalence of ADEs during hospitalization was recorded in 22 studies, [18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33, 35, 37,38,39,40,41, 43, 44] with a reported prevalence ranging from 0.6% to 50%. Yadesa et al. [44] reported that 48.9% of elderly patients (> 65 years) experienced ADEs during hospitalization. The overall median prevalence rate among the 22 studies was 7.8% (IQR: 4.2%–21.4%).

Seriousness or severity of ADEs was assessed in a total of 22 studies [18, 20, 22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35, 37,38,39,40,41, 43]; however, data were only available for 19 studies. The assessment of the seriousness or severity of ADEs varied between studies. ADE severity was reported in ten studies [18, 22, 25,26,27, 37,38,39,40,41], while eight studies [23, 24, 28, 29, 33,34,35, 43] reported on the seriousness of ADEs. Makiwane et al. [31], however, provided data on both severity and seriousness of ADRs, where the proportion of severe ADRs and serious ADRs were 11·5% and 55·7%, respectively. A South African study [35] focused primarily on serious ADRs, where the prevalence of serious ADRs was considered as their primary outcome measure. They reported that 11·3% of serious ADRs caused admissions, while 8·8% prolonged hospitalizations. Tumwikirize et al. [43] reported that there were no serious ADEs in their study. The reported occurrence of serious or severe ADEs among the studies varied from 1.6% to 87.5%. The overall median proportion of serious or severe ADEs among the 19 studies was 25.0% (IQR: 7.5%–49.0%) of all ADEs. The reported ADE-related fatality rate ranged from 0.1% to 3.2% among 14 studies. Six studies [25, 27, 29, 31, 41, 43] reported no occurrence of ADE-related fatality. Angamo et al. [20] and Mouton et al. [36] focused exclusively on mortality associated with ADEs, investigating the proportion of deaths attributed to ADEs in medical inpatients. Angamo et al. [20] reported that 1·5% of deaths were attributed to ADEs in hospitalized patients while Mouton et al. [36] reported 2·9% and 16·0% of deaths during hospitalizations and all in-hospital deaths were related to ADEs, respectively. The median proportion of fatal ADEs reported for the 14 studies was 0.1% (IQR: 0.1%–0.4%) of all study populations.

Twenty-three studies [18, 20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27, 29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41, 43] carried out preventability assessments and found that the median proportion of preventable ADEs ranged from 4.1% to 97.7% of all ADEs. However, data for two studies [30, 32] were not published, as ADE-specific data could not be recovered. The reported data of all adverse events (i.e., drug and non-drug related) in the two studies revealed that 60.0% and 52.0% of events were preventable, respectively. The median proportion of preventable ADEs reported among the studies was 45.0% (IQR: 30.0%–59.0%) of all ADEs. Elaborated ADE results in general patient cohorts is provided in Additional file 4, Table S4.

The prevalence of ADEs that occurred among the adult population (aged ≥ 18 years) was 12.5% (IQR: 9.4%–24.9%) of all study populations and 7.9% (IQR: 3.2%–13.6%) in pediatric patients. Furthermore, two studies reported that 14.3% and 48.9% of elderly patients (> 65 years) experienced ADEs whilst three studies reported 11.5%, 5.6% and 0.6% prevalence of ADEs among all age groups (aged 0–100 years).

Studies with a focus on specific patient cohorts

Fifty-one studies were carried out on specific patients, with a total of 67,806 patients. The proportion of females included in this study ranged from 21·0% to 75·9%. These studies were carried out in 14 African countries, including Nigeria (8), Morocco (1), Uganda (6), South Africa (3), Tanzania (1), Ethiopia (15), Ghana (2), Kenya (3), Cameroon (4), Mali (2), Malawi (1), Namibia (2), Zimbabwe (1) and Eritrea (2). Thirty-two studies [45,46,47,48, 50, 52, 54, 56, 58, 59, 62, 64,65,66,67,68,69,70, 72, 74, 78, 80, 82,83,84,85,86, 88, 90, 91, 93, 94] were carried out at a single center, 15 studies [49, 51, 55, 57, 60, 61, 63, 71, 73, 76, 79, 87, 89, 92, 95] were conducted at a multi-center, and four studies [53, 75, 77, 81] were conducted in the community setting. The community setting comprised home settings, community health facilities, and drug outlets. Sixteen studies [48, 53, 56, 57, 60, 65, 69, 72, 75, 79, 82,83,84, 88, 91, 92] were conducted prospectively, 20 studies [45,46,47, 49, 51, 61, 62, 64, 66, 67, 71, 73, 78, 80, 81, 85, 87, 89, 93, 94] were conducted retrospectively, and 12 studies [50, 52, 55, 58, 59, 68, 70, 76, 77, 86, 90, 95] used the cross-sectional study design. Gudina et al. [63] used both retrospective and prospective study designs, Bahta et al. [54] used both cross-sectional and analytical study designs while Namulindwa et al. [74] used mixed design study. The majority of these studies targeted patients with human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) [45,46,47,48,49, 57, 61,62,63,64, 66,67,68,69,70, 73, 74, 78, 79, 82,83,84, 89, 90, 93, 94]. Eight studies [50, 51, 60, 71, 85,86,87, 92] focused on tuberculosis (TB) patients, while Michael et al. [72] and Nemaura et al. [76] targeted patients co-infected with HIV and TB. In addition, three studies [80, 91, 95] focused on pediatric patients (< 15 years) suffering from cancer, while Babirye et al. [52], Berhe et al. [55] and Elangwe et al. [59] investigated ADEs in patients with hypertension and Type II diabetes mellitus, respectively. In addition, three studies [53, 75, 77] focused on malaria patients. Beyene et al. [56] and Shegena et al. [88] targeted epileptic patients and heart failure patients, respectively. A Ugandan study [65] examined antibiotic-associated suspected ADR among hospitalized patients, while a Nigerian study [81] evaluated ADE to ivermectin. Bahta et al. [54] and Chikowe et al. [58] assessed ADEs associated with mental disorders. Seventy-five percent of the studies were carried out in outpatient clinics, while the remaining studies were carried out in medical wards, pediatric oncology wards, DR-TB treatment wards, and community settings. Thirty-one studies were carried out on Adult populations, 14 studies on all age groups while six studies were performed among pediatric patients [49, 53, 80, 83, 91, 95]. The WHO definition of ADRs was frequently used in most studies. The majority of included studies used medical record review for the detection of ADEs. Fourteen studies [52, 57, 59, 60, 64, 65, 69, 75, 82,83,84, 88, 91, 95] reported causality assessment, with the Naranjo criteria most frequently referenced. An evaluation of the seriousness or severity of ADEs was performed in 31 studies. Twenty studies [45, 47, 57,58,59,60,61, 63,64,65, 69, 74, 76, 83, 85, 87, 88, 91, 94, 95] highlighted the tools that were employed in the assessment of seriousness or severity of ADEs, with the most common tool used being the WHO criteria. Five studies [57, 65, 75, 83, 87] analyzed the preventability of ADEs, with Schumock criteria employed in four studies. We found one study [51] reporting ADE as a direct cause of admission among specific patient populations. One study [51] reported the prevalence of ADEs leading to hospital admissions, with a reported prevalence of 16.9% of its TB patients (Table 5).

Table 5 Adverse drug event results in specific patient cohorts
Full size table

The prevalence of ADEs during hospitalization was recorded in eight studies [65, 80, 85,86,87,88, 91, 95] ranging from 19.0% to 100%. A higher ADE prevalence of 92.9% and 100% were recorded in pediatrics cancer patients (< 15 years) [80, 91] and 89.0% and 90.0% in TB patients [85, 86] in four studies, respectively. The ADE occurrence was extraordinarily high in these studies, highlighting priority areas for improvement. The median prevalence of ADEs occurring during hospitalization among the eight studies was 74.2% (IQR: 54.1%–90.7%) of all patients.

Thirty-six studies [45,46,47,48,49,50, 52, 54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61, 63, 64, 66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74, 76, 78, 79, 82,83,84, 89, 90, 93, 94] reported data on the prevalence of ADEs in the outpatient setting ranging from 4.3% to 100%. Gebremeskel et al. [62] and Van Der Walt [92] did not provide separate data for ADE prevalence in their study. Five studies reported a higher ADE prevalence of 93.8% and 100% in patients with mental disorders [54, 58], 85.8% [57] in HIV patients, 83.0% in patients co-infected with HIV and TB [76] and 77.3% in TB patients [50], respectively. The overall median prevalence of ADEs among the 36 studies was 22.9% (IQR: 14.6%–56.1%) of all study populations.

Four studies [53, 75, 77, 81] reported ADE prevalence in the community setting ranging from 22.5% to 50.7%. A higher prevalence of 50.7% was reported in malaria patients [77]. The overall median ADE prevalence was 32.6% (IQR: 26.0%–41.3%) of all study populations in the community setting. Seriousness or severity of ADEs was assessed in a total of 31 studies; however, data were only reported in 26 studies [45,46,47,48,49, 51, 57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66, 69, 72, 83, 84, 86,87,88, 91, 92, 94]. The proportion of serious or severe ADEs reported in the 26 studies ranged from 1.2% to 80.3% of all observations. Severe ADEs was reported in 23 studies [45,46,47,48,49, 51, 57,58,59,60,61,62,63, 66, 69, 83, 84, 86,87,88, 91, 92, 94] while three studies [64, 65, 72] reported serious ADEs. Gebremeskel et al. [62] assessed the incidence and predictors of severe ADRs as a primary outcome measure, while Sagwa et al. [85] exclusively reported the occurrence of moderate-severe ADEs occurring during drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) treatments. Sagwa et al. [85] reported that 51·0% of their study subjects experienced moderate to severe ADEs. Van der Walt et al. [92] exclusively focused on the impact of severe ADR on MDR-TB patients as a primary outcome measure. A higher proportion of 80.3% [94], 57.0% [46], 56.4% [47] of ADEs in HIV patients and 52.2% [49] in pediatric HIV patients (< 15 years) were reported as severe in four studies. The overall median proportion of serious or severe ADEs reported among the 26 studies was 16.2% (IQR: 8.2%–32.5%) of all ADEs.

Data for ADE-related fatality were only available for nine studies [60, 70, 72, 77, 84, 87, 89, 91, 94]. Three studies [60, 70, 72] reported no occurrence of ADE-related fatality. Two studies reported a higher ADE-related fatality rate of 9.0% in TB patients [87] and 8.9% in malaria patients [77]. The median ADE-related fatality rate reported was 1.3% (IQR: 0%–7.5%) of all study subjects with certain clinical conditions.

Data for preventability assessment were provided in four studies [57, 65, 75, 88]. Kiguba et al. [65] reported a higher percentage of preventable ADEs of 63.6% in antibiotic-associated suspected ADR among hospitalized patients. The median proportion of preventable ADEs reported among the four studies was 12.4% (IQR: 7.1%–28.1%) of all ADEs. Elaborated ADE results in specific patient cohorts is provided in Additional file 4, Table S5.

The prevalence of ADEs that occurred among the adult population (aged ≥ 18 years) was 24.3% (IQR: 17.8%–51.5%) of all study populations. We observed a pooled prevalence of 51.2% (IQR: 19.7%–62.2%) among all age groups (aged 0–100 years) and 34.3% (IQR: 18.0%–80.1%) in pediatric patients (aged < 18). We found no studies carried out in specific patient populations that reported the occurrence of ADEs in elderly patients (> 65 years).

Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest systematic review to synthesize existing evidence of ADE prevalence rates and report the nature of ADEs from four different settings in Africa. Our findings confirm the challenges of ADEs on African healthcare systems, and highlight the importance to invest in comprehensive ADE prevention and control including surveillance and monitoring systems, targeted capacity building programs, and efforts towards risk-stratified care, which are vital but unfortunately missing in many African settings. Systematic reviews of ADE occurrence in different settings are scarce in Africa, thereby making a comparison to earlier results difficult. A review by Moulton et al. [10] reviewed the burden of serious ADRs in Sub-Saharan Africa and reported a median proportion of admissions attributed to ADRs was 4.8%, which was comparable to the finding from our study (6.0%). In addition, the prevalence of ADE-related hospital admissions aligned with data from international literature [96, 97]. Tache et al. [96] reviewed the prevalence of ADEs in ambulatory care settings and reported that 5.1% of hospital admissions were due to ADRs, whilst Kongkaew et al. [97] found a median of 5.3% of hospital admissions were caused by ADR.

We found a higher median ADE prevalence during hospitalization (74.2%) in specific patients than the general patients (7.8%). Differences in drug burden may be one of the main causes of this observed disparity, considering that the specific patient cohorts included a greater proportion of cancer, tuberculosis and HIV patients who would require several drugs for continuous therapies and, therefore, at high risk of potential drug-drug interactions leading to ADEs. Notwithstanding, the results as observed for general patients is comparable with results reported by Krähenbühl-Melcher et al. [98] (6.0%) of all hospitalized patients, and Patel et al. [99] (6.3%) during hospitalization. This finding was also similar to a previous systematic review performed by Mekonnen et al. [7] in African hospital setting, where a median estimate for ADEs that occurred during hospitalization was 7.5%.

In the outpatient settings, we discovered a higher median prevalence of ADEs (22.9%), compared to previous studies. An earlier systematic review found that the prevalence of ADEs was 12.8% in the ambulatory setting [96]. Insani et al. [17] reported an ADR prevalence of 8.3% in the primary care setting. This difference might result from different ADE detection methods, as all studies in our review used multiple strategies for ADE detection. In addition, included studies in the outpatient setting involved specific patients (such as HIV/AIDS patients who were vulnerable to ADEs). Outpatient ADEs were likely to be higher due to the capture of patients with a wide range of mild, moderate, and severe symptoms. These factors were also likely to have contributed to the higher ADE prevalence observed in our review. We observed extraordinarily high rates of ADE occurrence in some scenario. Given the existence of established countermeasures that demonstrate field effectiveness in risk mitigation for reduction of ADEs [100,101,102,103], we recommend ADE prevention and control initiatives aimed at reducing the burden of ADEs in Africa such as nurse and pharmacist-led medication monitoring as well as educational sessions to enhance ADE awareness across various departments in the healthcare systems.

Notwithstanding variations in the seriousness or severity of ADEs reported among the studies, we reported a median proportion of 25.0% and 16.2% of serious or severe ADEs in general and specific patients, respectively, which was in sharp contrast with a much lower ADE fatality rate of 0.1% and 1.3% in our review. This might imply that fatal ADEs were likely to be underreported in studies carried out in Africa. Of 78 included studies, only 28 studies reported data on ADE-related fatality. On the other hand, such rare occurrence of fatal ADEs was consistent with previous studies, as evidenced by Patel et al. [99] (0.08%), indicating improved quality of healthcare in terms of saving lives in African settings. Without any further improvements in ADE prevention and control, this we presume might have an unexpected consequence; in that a shift in healthcare burden might occur from decreasing death tolls to rising hospitalizations as what we observed with respect to the serious or severe ADE occurrence in the current review. This alarming finding suggests continuing efforts should be committed to assure safer medication use for patients in Africa.

The proportion of preventable ADEs was 45.0% and 12.4% in general and specific patient cohorts, respectively. This finding suggests that a higher occurrence of ADEs in general patients are more preventable compared to ADEs that occur in settings where patients are vulnerable and are subjected to complex drug regimens. The under-reported data of preventable ADEs among included studies of specific patient cohorts might be the reason for this observed disparity. The finding in general patients was consistent with two previous reviews [7, 104]. Hakkarainen et al. [104] reported that preventable ADRs among inpatients and outpatients were 52.0% and 45.0%, respectively, while Mekonnen et al. [7] estimated that 43.5% of ADEs were deemed preventable. Adaption of advanced monitoring and reporting systems, as well as appropriate prescribing practices might help improve medication safety in Africa.

ADE prevalence varied across the various age groups, with pediatrics in specific patient cohorts experiencing higher ADE prevalence relative to adults. This is not surprising due to the relatively lesser availability of pediatrics age-tailored medications putting them at a higher risk of under and overdosing. In addition, timely diagnosis of ADEs among pediatrics is challenging due to their difficulties in communicating and describing ADE related symptoms being experienced effectively [105]. The comparison of age-related ADE prevalence with previous studies is challenging, mainly because our studies vary in various aspects, including diverse population characteristics and clinical settings. This may explain the variation in the prevalence rate reported.

The most important strength of this review is the comprehensive assessment of the occurrence and nature of ADEs reported from a large number of the most recent studies in both specific and general patient cohorts in four different settings in Africa. This review also adopted a broader inclusion criterion consisting of studies published on ADEs caused by specific drug (s) or clinical conditions. There are several limitations to be considered. First, there was a limited number of high-quality studies assessing the prevalence of ADEs in African settings. There were considerable variations in the study populations, study length, sample size, and study settings among included studies. Information regarding the detection and assessment of causality, preventability, and seriousness or severity of ADEs were poorly reported. Second, there were also heterogeneities concerning the methods for identifying ADE occurrence and their definitions, which may be one of the reasons for a wide range of estimates across the reviewed studies. Third, ADE prevalence data were not always clearly described in the publications. In addition, prevalence should be derived from whole population. However, the included studies estimated the prevalence rates of ADEs across vastly differing patient groups, which may not be particularly useful as underlying conditions and drug exposure may widely differ. Although we provided the median prevalence rates for general patients (i.e., ADEs occurring in all patients treated within a certain healthcare setting) and specific patient groups (i.e., ADEs caused by clinical condition (such as HIV patients) or ADEs caused by exposure to specific drug(s) (such as antibiotics), results should be interpreted with care. Finally, there were great variations and inconsistencies in the type of drugs in association with observed ADEs, making it a challenge to summarize reports on causative agents.

Conclusion

ADEs considerably exacerbates the challenges affecting the progress of the healthcare systems in Africa with significant fraction of ADEs being preventable. Our findings indicate a higher ADE prevalence in specific patients and emphasize important areas for improvement, particularly in patients at high risk (e.g., pediatrics, HIV, TB patients) in various settings. This review also demonstrates the challenges of ADEs in different settings in Africa and the severity or seriousness of ADEs, which calls for targeted preventive strategies particularly in high-risk patients to help lessen the burden of ADEs on the healthcare system. There was a limited number of studies concerning ADEs occurring in community settings, pediatric patients and the elderly population; therefore, future studies should focus on this setting and these population groups in Africa.

Availability of data and materials

The authors confirm that data supporting this study are available within the text and its supplementary materials.

References

  1. Dixon-Woods M. Why is patient safety so hard? A selective review of ethnographic studies. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2010;15:11–6. https://doi.org/10.1258/jhsrp.2009.009041.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Brennan TA, Leape LL, Laird NM, Hebert L, Localio AR, Lawthers AG, et al. Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients: results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study I. N Engl J Med. 1991;324(6):370–6. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199102073240604.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Panagioti M, Khan K, Keers RN, Abuzour A, Phipps D, Kontopantelis E, et al. Prevalence, severity, and nature of preventable patient harm across medical care settings: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2019;366: l4185. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l4185.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Gallagher P, Lang PO, Cherubini A, Topinková E, Cruz-Jentoft A, Montero Errasquín B, et al. Prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing in an acutely ill population of older patients admitted to six European hospitals. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2011;67(11):1175–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-011-1061-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Spinewine A, Schmader KE, Barber N, Hughes C, Lapane KL, Swine C, et al. Appropriate prescribing in elderly people: how well can it be measured and optimised? Lancet. 2007;370(9582):173–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61091-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kaushal R, Bates DW, Landrigan C, McKenna KJ, Clapp MD, Federico F, et al. Medication errors and adverse drug events in pediatric inpatients. JAMA. 2001;285(16):2114–20. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.285.16.2114.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mekonnen AB, Alhawassi TM, McLachlan AJ, Brien JE. Adverse drug events and medication errors in African hospitals: a systematic review. Drugs Real World Outcomes. 2018;5(1):1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40801-017-0125-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Olsson S, Pal SN, Dodoo A. Pharmacovigilance in resource-limited countries. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. 2015;8(4):449–60. https://doi.org/10.1586/17512433.2015.1053391.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ribeiro-Vaz I, Silva AM, Costa Santos C, Cruz-Correia R. How to promote adverse drug reaction reports using information systems—a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2016;16:27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-016-0265-8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Mouton JP, Jobanputra N, Tatz G, Cohen K. Serious adverse drug reactions in sub-Saharan Africa in the era of antiretroviral treatment: a systematic review. Pharmacol Res Perspect. 2021;9(6): e00875. https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.875.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. American Society of Health-System Pharmacist. Suggested definitions and relationships among medication misadventures, medication errors, adverse drug events, and adverse drug reactions. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1998;55(2):165–6. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/55.2.165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. World Health Organization (WHO). Essential Medicines and Health Products Information Portal: a World Health Organization Resource 2018; http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/en/d/Jh2992e/2.html

  13. Edwards IR, Aronson JK. Adverse drug reactions: definitions, diagnosis, and management. Lancet. 2000;356(9237):1255–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02799-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7): e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Smyth RMD, Gargon E, Kirkham J, Cresswell L, Golder S, Smyth R, et al. Adverse drug reactions in children: a systematic review. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(3): e24061. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0024061.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Leung JS, Johnson DW, Sperou AJ, Crotts J, Saude E, Hartling L, et al. A systematic review of adverse drug events associated with administration of common asthma medications in children. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(8): e0182738. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182738.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Insani WN, Whittlesea C, Alwafi H, Man KKC, Chapman S, Wei L. Prevalence of adverse drug reactions in the primary care setting: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(5): e0252161. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252161.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Adedapo ADA, Adedeji WA, Adedapo IA, Adedapo KS. Cohort study on adverse drug reactions in adults admitted to the medical wards of a tertiary hospital in Nigeria: prevalence, incidence, risk factors and fatality. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2021;87(4):1878–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.14577.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Aderemi-Williams RI, Awodele O, Boyle CA. Adverse drug reactions amongst adult patients admitted in Lagos State University Teaching Hospital Lagos. Nigeria Curr Drug Saf. 2015;10(2):136–44. https://doi.org/10.2174/1574886309666140601211211.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Angamo MT, Chalmers L, Curtain CM, Yilma D, Bereznicki L. Mortality from adverse drug reaction-related hospitalizations in South-West Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study. J Clin Pharm. 2018;43(6):790–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpt.12702.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Angamo MT, Curtain CM, Chalmers L, Yilma D, Bereznicki L. Predictors of adverse drug reaction-related hospitalisation in Southwest Ethiopia: a prospective cross-sectional study. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(10):1–17. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186631.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Asio L, Nasasira M, Kiguba R. Hospital admissions attributed to adverse drug reactions in tertiary care in Uganda: burden and contributing factors. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2023;14:20420986231188840. https://doi.org/10.1177/20420986231188842.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Benkirane RR, Abouqal R, Haimeur CC, Ech Cherif El Kettani SS, Azzouzi AA, Mdaghri Alaoui AA, et al. Incidence of adverse drug events and medication errors in intensive care units: a prospective multicenter study. J Patient Saf. 2009;5(1):16–22. https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0b013e3181990d51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Benkirane R, Pariente A, Achour S, Ouammi L, Azzouzi A, Soulaymani R. Prevalence and preventability of adverse drug events in a teaching hospital: a cross-sectional study. East Mediterr Health. 2009;15(5):1145–55.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Dedefo MG, Mitike AH, Angamo MT. Incidence and determinants of medication errors and adverse drug events among hospitalized children in West Ethiopia. BMC Pediatr. 2016;16:81. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-016-0619-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Eshetie TC, Hailemeskel B, Mekonnen N, Paulos G, Mekonnen AB, Girma T. Adverse drug events in hospitalized children at Ethiopian University Hospital: a prospective observational study. BMC Pediatr. 2015;15:83. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-015-0401-0.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Ersulo TA, Yizengaw MA, Tesfaye BT. Incidence of adverse drug events in patients hospitalized in the medical wards of a teaching referral hospital in Ethiopia: a prospective observational study. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. 2022;23(1):30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40360-022-00570-w.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Jennane N, Madani N, Oulderrkhis R, Abidi K, Khoudri I, Belayachi J, et al. Incidence of medication errors in a Moroccan medical intensive care unit. Int Arch Med. 2011;4:32. https://doi.org/10.1186/1755-7682-4-32.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Kiguba R, Karamagi C, Bird SM. Incidence, risk factors and risk prediction of hospital-acquired suspected adverse drug reactions: a prospective cohort of Ugandan inpatients. BMJ Open. 2017;7(1): e010568. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010568.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Letaief M, El Mhamdi S, El-Asady R, Siddiqi S, Abdullatif A. Adverse events in a Tunisian hospital: results of a retrospective cohort study. Int J Qual Health Care. 2010;22(5):380–5. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzq040.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Makiwane M, Decloedt E, Chirehwa M, Rosenkranz B, Kruger M. Adverse drug reactions in paediatric in-patients in a South African Tertiary Hospital. J Trop Pediatr. 2019;65(4):389–96. https://doi.org/10.1093/tropej/fmy067.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Matsaseng T, Moodley J. Adverse events in gynaecology at King Edward VIII Hospital, Durban, South Africa. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2005;25(7):676–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Mehta U, Durrheim DN, Blockman M, Kredo T, Gounden R, Barnes KI. Adverse drug reactions in adult medical inpatients in a South African hospital serving a community with a high HIV/AIDS prevalence: prospective observational study. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2008;65(3):396–406. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.2007.03034.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Mouton JP, Njuguna C, Kramer N, Stewart A, Mehta U, Blockman M, et al. Adverse drug reactions causing admission to medical wards: a cross-sectional survey at 4 hospitals in South Africa. Medicine. 2016;95(19): e3437. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000003437.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Mouton JP, Fortuin-de Smidt MC, Jobanputra N, Mehta U, Stewart A, de Waal R, et al. Serious adverse drug reactions at two children’s hospitals in South Africa. BMC Pediatr. 2020;20(1):3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-019-1892-x.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Mouton JP, Mehta U, Parrish AG, Wilson DP, Stewart A, Njuguna CW, et al. Mortality from adverse drug reactions in adult medical inpatients at four hospitals in South Africa: a cross-sectional survey. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2015;80(4):818–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.12567.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Mouton JP, Jobanputra N, Njuguna C, Gunter H, Stewart A, Mehta U, et al. Adult medical emergency unit presentations due to adverse drug reactions in a setting of high HIV prevalence. Afr J Emerg Med. 2021;11(1):46–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afjem.2020.10.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Oshikoya KA, Chukwura H, Njokanma OF, Senbanjo IO, Ojo I. Incidence and cost estimate of treating pediatric adverse drug reactions in Lagos. Nigeria Sao Paulo Med J. 2011;129(3):153–64. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1516-31802011000300006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Oshikoya KA, Njokanma OF, Chukwura HA, Ojo I. Adverse drug reactions in Nigerian children. Paed Perinat Drug Ther. 2007;8(2):81–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sahilu T, Getachew M, Melaku T, Sheleme T. Adverse drug events and contributing factors among hospitalized adult patients at Jimma Medical Center, Southwest Ethiopia: a prospective observational study. Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2020;93: 100611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.curtheres.2020.100611.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Sendekie AK, Kasahun AE, Limenh LW, Dagnaw AD, Belachew EA. Clinical and economic impact of adverse drug reactions in hospitalised patients: prospective matched nested case-control study in Ethiopia. BMJ Open. 2023;13(6): e073777. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-073777.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Tipping B, Kalula S, Badri M. The burden and risk factors for adverse drug events in older patients–a prospective cross-sectional study. S Afr Med J. 2006;96(12):1255–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Tumwikirize WA, Ogwal-Okeng JW, Vernby A, Anokbonggo WW, Gustafsson LL, Lundborg SC. Adverse drug reactions in patients admitted on internal medicine wards in a district and regional hospital in Uganda. Afr Health Sci. 2011;11(1):72–8.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Yadesa TM, Kitutu FE, Tamukong R, Alele PE. Predictors of hospital-acquired adverse drug reactions: a cohort of Ugandan older adults. BMC Geriatr. 2022;22(1):359. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-022-03003-9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Abah IO, Dayom WD, Dangiwa DA, Aderemi-Williams R, Anejo-Okopi J, Agbaji OO, et al. Comparative incidence of adverse drug reaction during the first and subsequent year of antiretroviral therapy in a Nigerian HIV infected cohort. Afr Health Sci. 2021;21(3):1027–39. https://doi.org/10.4314/ahs.v21i3.10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Abah IO, Ncube NBQ, Bradley HA, Agbaji OO, Kanki P. Antiretroviral therapy-associated adverse drug reactions and their effects on virologic failure-a retrospective cohort study in Nigeria. Curr HIV Res. 2018;16(6):436–46. https://doi.org/10.2174/1389450120666190214144609.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Abah IO, Akanbi M, Abah ME, Finangwai AI, Dady CW, Falang KD, et al. Incidence and predictors of adverse drug events in an African cohort of HIV-infected adults treated with efavirenz. Germs. 2015;5(3):83–91. https://doi.org/10.11599/germs.2015.1075.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Abdissa SG, Fekade D, Feleke Y, Seboxa T, Diro E. Adverse drug reactions associated with antiretroviral treatment among adult Ethiopian patients in a tertiary hospital. Ethiop Med J. 2012;50(2):107–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Abdela J, Assefa A, Shamele S. Prevalence of adverse drug reactions among pediatric patients on antiretroviral therapy in selected hospitals in Eastern Ethiopia: 8-year retrospective cross-sectional study. J Int Assoc Provid AIDS Care. 2019;18:2325958218823208. https://doi.org/10.1177/2325958218823208.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Amalba A, Bugri AA. Assessing the prevalence and effect of adverse drug reactions among patients receiving first line anti-tubercular medicines in the Tamale Teaching Hospital, Ghana. Pan Afr Med J. 2021;38:191. https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2021.38.191.24301.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Ategyeka PM, Muhoozi M, Naturinda R, Kageni P, Namugenyi C, Kasolo A, Kisaka S, Kiwanuka N. Prevalence and factors associated with reported adverse-events among patients on multi-drug-resistant tuberculosis treatment in two referral hospitals in Uganda. BMC Infect Dis. 2023;23(1):149. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08085-3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Babirye M, Yadesa TM, Tamukong R, Obwoya PS. Prevalence and factors associated with drug therapy problems among hypertensive patients at hypertension clinic of Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital, Uganda: a |cross-sectional study. Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis. 2023;17:17539447231160320. https://doi.org/10.1177/17539447231160319.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Bahina LE, Youmba CJ, Mabvouna RB, Sobngwi J. Assessment of adverse drug reactions in the home management of malaria cases of children under 5 years using artemisinin-based combination therapy in Mfou health district, Center region of Cameroon. J Public Health Afr. 2018;9(3):763. https://doi.org/10.4081/jphia.2018.763.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Bahta M, Berhe T, Russom M, Tesfamariam EH, Ogbaghebriel A. Magnitude, nature, and risk factors of adverse drug reactions associated with first generation antipsychotics in outpatients with schizophrenia: a cross-sectional study. Integr Pharm Res Pract. 2020;9:205–17. https://doi.org/10.2147/IPRP.S271814.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Berhe DF, Taxis K, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM, Mulugeta A, Mengistu YT, Burgerhof JGM, et al. Impact of adverse drug events and treatment satisfaction on patient adherence with antihypertensive medication - a study in ambulatory patients. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2017;83(9):2107–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.13312.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Beyene YB, Daba FB, Goro KK, Senbeta BS. Drug therapy problems and predicting factors among ambulatory epileptic patients in Jimma Medical Center, Southwest Ethiopia. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(4): e0267673. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267673.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Bezabhe WM, Bereznicki LR, Chalmers L, et al. Adverse drug reactions and clinical outcomes in patients initiated on antiretroviral therapy: a prospective cohort study from Ethiopia. Drug Saf. 2015;38(7):629–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-015-0295-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Chikowe I, Domingo M, Mwakaswaya V, Parveen S, Mafuta C, Kampira E. Adverse drug reactions experienced by out-patients taking chlorpromazine or haloperidol at Zomba Mental Hospital, Malawi. BMC Res Notes. 2019;12(1):376. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-019-4398-6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Elangwe A, Katte JC, Tchapmi D, Figueras A, Mbanya JC. Adverse drug reactions to anti-diabetic drugs are commonest in patients whose treatment do not adhere to diabetes management clinical guidelines: cross-sectional study in a tertiary care service in sub-Saharan Africa. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2020;76(11):1601–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-020-02949-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. El Hamdouni M, Ahid S, Bourkadi JE, Benamor J, Hassar M, Cherrah Y. Incidence of adverse reactions caused by first-line anti-tuberculosis drugs and treatment outcome of pulmonary tuberculosis patients in Morocco. Infection. 2020;48(1):43–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-019-01324-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Eluwa GI, Badru T, Agu KA, Akpoigbe KJ, Chabikuli O, Hamelmann C. Adverse drug reactions to antiretroviral therapy (ARVs): incidence, type and risk factors in Nigeria. BMC Clin Pharmacol. 2012;12:7. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6904-12-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Gebremeskel TG, Gebreyowhans D, Abrha Gesesew H, Ward PR. Incidence and predictors of severe adverse drug reaction among patients on antiretroviral therapy in Tigray, Ethiopia: a retrospective cohort study. HIV AIDS. 2021;13:641–9. https://doi.org/10.2147/HIV.S310419.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Gudina EK, Teklu AM, Berhan A, Gebreegziabhier A, Seyoum T, Nega A, et al. Magnitude of antiretroviral drug toxicity in adult HIV patients in Ethiopia: a cohort study at seven teaching hospitals. Ethiop J Health Sci. 2017;27(Suppl 1):39–52. https://doi.org/10.4314/ejhs.v27i1.5s.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Hagos L, Fessehaye S, Anand IS. Nature and prevalence of adverse drug reaction of antiretroviral medications in Halibet National Referral Hospital: a retrospective study. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. 2019;20(1):24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40360-019-0307-9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Kiguba R, Karamagi C, Bird SM. Antibiotic-associated suspected adverse drug reactions among hospitalized patients in Uganda: a prospective cohort study. Pharmacol Res Perspect. 2017;5(2): e00298. https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.298.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Kim AA, Wanjiku L, Macharia DK, Wangai M, Isavwa A, Abdi H, et al. Adverse events in HIV-infected persons receiving antiretroviral drug regimens in a large Urban Slum in Nairobi, Kenya, 2003–2005. J Int Assoc Physicians AIDS Care. 2007;6(3):206–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1545109707304494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Kindie E, Alamrew Anteneh Z, Worku E. Time to development of adverse drug reactions and associated factors among adult HIV positive patients on antiretroviral treatment in Bahir Dar City, Northwest Ethiopia. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(12): e0189322. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Lartey M, Asante-Quashie A, Essel A, Kenu E, Ganu V, Neequaye A. Adverse drug reactions to antiretroviral therapy during the early art period at a tertiary hospital in Ghana. Pan Afr Med J. 2014;18:25. https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2014.18.25.3886.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Isa AM, Abubakar IJ, Chedi BAZ. Adverse drug reactions to antiretroviral drugs and impact on treatment adherence among HIV patients in northwestern Nigeria. Drugs Ther Perspect. 2018;34(10):488–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40267-018-0546-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Namme Luma H, Doualla M-S, Choukem S-P, Temfack E, Ashuntantang G, Achu Joko H, et al. Adverse drug reactions of Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy (HAART) in HIV infected patients at the General Hospital, Douala, Cameroon: a cross sectional study. Pan Afr Med J. 2012;12:87.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Merid MW, Gezie LD, Kassa GM, Muluneh AG, Akalu TY, Yenit MK. Incidence and predictors of major adverse drug events among drug-resistant tuberculosis patients on second-line anti-tuberculosis treatment in Amhara regional state public hospitals; Ethiopia: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Infect Dis. 2019;19(1):286. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-019-3919-1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Michael OS, Sogaolu OM, Fehintola FA, Ige OM, Falade CO. Adverse events to first line anti-tuberculosis drugs in patients co-infected with HIV and tuberculosis. Ann Ibd Pg Med. 2016;14(1):21–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Mitkie AA, Bekele FB, Debiso AT. Predictors of adverse drug reaction among adult HIV-infected patients on antiretroviral therapy in government hospitals of Kaffa Zone, Ethiopia; November 2018: a retrospective cohort. Pan Afr Med J. 2021;38:181. https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2021.38.181.19915.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Namulindwa A, Wasswa JH, Muyindike W, Tamukong R, Oloro J. Prevalence and factors associated with adverse drug events among patients on dolutegravir-based regimen at the Immune Suppression Syndrome Clinic of Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital, Uganda: a mixed design study. AIDS Res Ther. 2022;19(1):18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12981-022-00442-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. Ndagije HB, Nambasa V, Manirakiza L, Kusemererwa D, Kajungu D, Olsson S, et al. The burden of adverse drug reactions due to artemisinin-based antimalarial treatment in selected Ugandan health facilities: an active follow-up study. Drug Saf. 2018;41(8):753–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-018-0659-x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Nemaura T, Dhoro M, Nhachi C, Kadzirange G, Chonzi P, Masimirembwa C. Evaluation of the prevalence, progression and severity of common adverse reactions (Lipodystrophy, CNS, peripheral neuropathy, and hypersensitivity reactions) associated with Anti-Retroviral Therapy (ART) and anti-tuberculosis treatment in outpatients in Zimbabwe. J AIDS Clin Res. 2013;4(4):203. https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-6113.1000203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Njau JD, Kabanywanyi AM, Goodman CA, MacArthur JR, Kapella BK, Gimnig JE, et al. Adverse drug events resulting from use of drugs with sulphonamide-containing anti-malarials and artemisinin-based ingredients: findings on incidence and household costs from three districts with routine demographic surveillance systems in rural Tanzania. Malar J. 2013;12(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-12-236.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Nkenfou-Tchinda CN, Tiedeu BA, Nkenfou CN, Nji AM, Mbange AE, Chedjou JPK, et al. Adverse drug reactions and associated factors among adult HIV-positive patients taking ART at the Yaoundé Central Hospital. Cameroon J Appl Pharm Sci. 2020;10(11):067–73. https://doi.org/10.7324/JAPS.2020.10119.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Onoya D, Hirasen K, van den Berg L, Miot J, Long LC, Fox MP. Adverse drug reactions among patients initiating second-line antiretroviral therapy in South Africa. Drug Saf. 2018;41(12):1343–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-018-0698-3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  80. Opanga L, Mulaku MN, Opanga SA, Godman B, Kurdi A. Adverse effects of chemotherapy and their management in Pediatric patients with Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma in Kenya: a descriptive, situation analysis study. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2019;19(5):423–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/14737140.2019.1606717.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Otubanjo OA, Adeoye GO, Ibidapo CA, Akinsanya B, Okeke P, Atalabi T, et al. Adverse reactions from community directed treatment with ivermectin (CDTI) for onchocerciasis and loiasis in Ondo State, Nigeria. Rev Biol Trop. 2008;56(4):1635–43. https://doi.org/10.15517/rbt.v56i4.5750.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Oumar AA, Dakouo M, Tchibozo A, Maiga M, Landouré G, Abdi-Bogoreh R, et al. Antiretroviral-induced adverse drug reactions in HIV-infected patients in Mali: a resource-limited setting experience. Int J Basic Clin Pharmacol. 2019;8(5):831–6. https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20191565.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  83. Oumar AA, Diallo K, Dembélé JP, Samaké L, Sidibé I, Togo B, et al. Adverse drug reactions to antiretroviral therapy: prospective study in children in Sikasso (Mali). J Pediatr pharmacol Ther. 2012;17(4):382–8. https://doi.org/10.5863/1551-6776-17.4.382.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  84. Reginald OO, Haruna MM, Sani GB, Eric TA, Adebola OT, Mathew I, et al. Adverse reactions associated with antiretroviral regimens in adult patients of a university teaching hospital HIV program in Zaria, Northern Nigeria: an observational cohort study. J Antivirals Antiretrovirals. 2012;4(1):006–13. https://doi.org/10.4172/jaa.1000039.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Sagwa EL, Mantel-Teeuwisse AK, Ruswa NC. Occurrence and clinical management of moderate-to-severe adverse events during drug-resistant tuberculosis treatment: a retrospective cohort study. J Pharm Policy Pract. 2014;7(1):14. https://doi.org/10.1186/2052-3211-7-14.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Sagwa E, Mantel-Teeuwisse AK, Ruswa N, Musasa JP, Pal S, Dhliwayo P, et al. The burden of adverse events during treatment of drug-resistant tuberculosis in Namibia. South Med Rev. 2012;5(1):6–13.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Shean K, Streicher E, Pieterson E, Symons G, van Zyl SR, Theron G, et al. Drug-associated adverse events and their relationship with outcomes in patients receiving treatment for extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis in South Africa. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(5): e63057. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0063057.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. Shegena EA, Nigussie KA, Tamukong R, Lumori BAE, Yadesa TM. Prevalence and factors associated with adverse drug reactions among heart failure patients hospitalized at Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital, Uganda. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2022;22(1):480. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12872-022-02937-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Sherfa A, Haile D, Yihune M, Sako S. Incidence and predictors of Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) among adult HIV positive patients on anti-retroviral treatment in Arba Minch town public health facilities, southern Ethiopia: a retrospective cohort study, 2020. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(5): e0251763. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251763.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  90. Tamira T, Woldemichael K, Tewelde T, Laelago T. Anti-retro viral therapy adverse drug reaction and associated factors among human immuno deficiency virus infected adult patients at Nigist Eleni Mohammed Memorial hospital, South Ethiopia. Afr Health Sci. 2020;20(2):560–7. https://doi.org/10.4314/ahs.v20i2.3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Tola WO, Melaku T, Fufa D, Sheleme T. Adverse drug events and contributing factors among pediatric cancer patients at Jimma University medical center, Southwest Ethiopia. BMC Pediatr. 2023;23(1):77. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-023-03891-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. Van der Walt M, Lancaster J, Odendaal R, Davis JG, Shean K, Farley J. Serious treatment related adverse drug reactions amongst anti-retroviral naive MDR-TB patients. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(4): e58817. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058817.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  93. Wangai MW, Mwanthi MA, Mbugua GG, Wangai PK, Suleh AJ, Kocholla LA. Occurrence of adverse drug reactions associated with highly active anti-retroviral therapy at Mbagathi District Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya. East Afr Med J. 2011;88(11):363–7.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Weldegebreal F, Mitiku H, Teklemariam Z. Magnitude of adverse drug reaction and associated factors among HIV-infected adults on antiretroviral therapy in Hiwot Fana specialized university hospital, eastern Ethiopia. Pan Afr Med J. 2016;24:255. https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2016.24.255.8356.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  95. Workalemahu G, Abdela OA, Yenit MK. Chemotherapy-related adverse drug reaction and associated factors among hospitalized paediatric cancer patients at hospitals in North-West Ethiopia. Drug Healthc Patient Saf. 2020;12:195–205. https://doi.org/10.2147/DHPS.S254644.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  96. Taché SV, Sönnichsen A, Ashcroft DM. Prevalence of adverse drug events in ambulatory care: a systematic review. Ann Pharmacother. 2011;45(7–8):977–89. https://doi.org/10.1345/aph.1P627.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Kongkaew C, Noyce PR, Ashcroft DM. Hospital admissions associated with adverse drug reactions: a systematic review of prospective observational studies. Ann Pharmacother. 2008;42(7):1017–25. https://doi.org/10.1345/aph.1L037.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Krähenbühl-Melcher A, Schlienger R, Lampert M, Haschke M, Drewe J, Krähenbühl S. Drug-related problems in hospitals: a review of the recent literature. Drug Saf. 2007;30(5):379–407. https://doi.org/10.2165/00002018-200730050-00003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Patel TK, Patel PB. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in Indian hospitals: a systematic review of prospective studies. Curr Drug Saf. 2016;11(2):128–36. https://doi.org/10.2174/1574886310666150921104523.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Lenander C, Elfsson B, Danielsson B, Midlov P, Hasselstrom J. Effects of a pharmacist-led structured medication review in primary care on drug-related problems and hospital admission rates: a randomized controlled trial. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2014;32(4):180–6. https://doi.org/10.3109/02813432.2014.972062.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  101. Touchette DR, Masica AL, Dolor RJ, Schumock GT, Choi YK, Kim Y, et al. Safety-focused medication therapy management: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2012;52(5):603–12. https://doi.org/10.1331/JAPhA.2012.12036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Gabe ME, Murphy F, Davies GA, Russell IT, Jordan S. Medication monitoring in a nurse-led respiratory outpatient clinic: pragmatic randomised trial of the West Wales Adverse Drug Reaction Profile. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(5): e96682.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  103. Kamarudin G, Penm J, Chaar B, Moles R. Educational interventions to improve prescribing competency: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2013;3(8): e003291. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003291.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  104. Hakkarainen KM, Hedna K, Petzold M, Hägg S. Percentage of patients with preventable adverse drug reactions and preventability of adverse drug reactions: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(3): e33236. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0033236.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  105. Takata GS, Mason W, Taketomo C, Logsdon T, Sharek PJ. Development, testing, and findings of a pediatric-focused trigger tool to identify medication-related harm in US children’s hospitals. Pediatrics. 2008;121(4):e927–35. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2007-1779.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the authors of all articles in this systematic review.

Funding

No funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Public Health, Southeast University, Nanjing, China

    Linda Nyame, Yuhua Hu, Hui Xue, Yong Tian, Lijun Fan & Wei Du

  2. School of Basic Medicine and Clinical Pharmacy, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing, China

    Emmanuel D. K. Fiagbey

  3. Health Research Institute, Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, Australia

    Xi Li

Authors
  1. Linda Nyame
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yuhua Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hui Xue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Emmanuel D. K. Fiagbey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Xi Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yong Tian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Lijun Fan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Wei Du
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

LN and WD conceived and designed the study. LN and HY acquired and analyzed the data. LN, HY, and HX assessed the quality of the study. LN and EDKF drafted the first manuscript. LN, HY, HX, EDKF, XL, YT, LF, and WD critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content and approved the final version for publication. All authors had full access to all data in the study, read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Linda Nyame or Wei Du.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nyame, L., Hu, Y., Xue, H. et al. Variation of adverse drug events in different settings in Africa: a systematic review. Eur J Med Res 29, 333 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-024-01934-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-024-01934-0

Keywords

European Journal of Medical Research

ISSN: 2047-783X

Contact us