Characteristics of dear health care provider letters in Europe and America

doi:10.19803/j.1672-8629.2022.03.09

Abstract

Abstract: Objective To give advice on risk communication methods related to Dear Health Care Provider Letters in China. Methods The difference in the initiation, implementation process, and effectiveness evaluation of Dear Health Care Provider Letters was analyzed by reviewing the related guidelines and regulations for the implementation of Dear Health Care Provider Letters in Europe and the United States. Results There was difference in specific classification, initiation, and details of Dear Health Care Provider Letters in Europe and the United States, which could serve as reference for China. Conclusion It is recommended that China start Dear Health Care Provider Letters, issue relevant guidelines and specify the details.

Key words: the European Union, the United States, Dear Health Care Provider Letter, risk communication, pharmacovigilance

CLC Number:

R951

LIANG Jiaqi, SHAO Rong, LIU Pengcheng, LI Ming, RENG Jingtian, TANG Ren, WANG Yue. Characteristics of dear health care provider letters in Europe and America[J]. Chinese Journal of Pharmacovigilance, 2022, 19(3): 275-278.

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zgywjj.magtechjournal.com/EN/10.19803/j.1672-8629.2022.03.09

https://zgywjj.magtechjournal.com/EN/Y2022/V19/I3/275

References

[1] NMPA. NMPA announcement on issuing good pharmacovigilance practices (No.65 of2021)[EB/OL].(2021-05-13)[2021-07-23]. https://www.nmpa.gov.cn/xxgk/ggtg/qtggtg/20210513151827179.html.
[2] MATHIAS M, SUSANNE K, LOUISE DBM, et al.The effectiveness of direct to healthcare professional communication - a systematic review of communication factor studies[J]. Res Social Adm Pharm, 2019, 15(5): 475-482.
[3] PIENING S, HAAIJER-RUSKAMP FM, GRAEFF DPA, et al.Healthcare professionals' self-reported experiences and preferences related to direct healthcare professional communications: a survey conducted in the Netherlands[J]. Drug Saf, 2012, 35(11): 1061-1072.
[4] LU KR, HU M, JIANG XH.Consideration on risk communication method in the drug risk management[J]. China Pharmacy(中国药房), 2010, 21(17): 1545-1549.
[5] CHENG H, LI XX.Post-marketing drug risk communication and exchange[J]. Clinical Medication Journal(临床药物治疗杂志), 2011, 9(3): 55-58.
[6] LI S, YANG Y.Drug risk communication method of America and Canada and its implication in China[J]. Chinese Journal of New Drugs(中国新药杂志), 2012, 21(18): 2104-2108.
[7] ZHU H, LIU LR, LAN GZ, et al.Comparison of the application of drug risk communication between America and China based on the case of rosiglitazone[J]. Chinese Journal of New Drugs(中国新药杂志), 2016, 25(10): 1089-1094.
[8] WU SF, JIN Y, CHANG H, et al.Drug risk communication in the European Union and United States between regulators and the public[J]. Chinese Journal of Pharmacovigilance(中国药物警戒), 2020, 17(2): 87-92.
[9] ZHANG D, LYU JT, SONG HB, et al. Study on drug risk commun-ication among drug regulatory agencies in the European Union, United States and Asian countries[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Pharmacovigilance(中国药物警戒),(2021-02-02)[2021-04-05]. http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.5219.R.20210202.1136.038.html.
[10] XIAO HL.Introduction to DHCP letter format and content guidance recently issued by FDA[J]. Drug Evaluation Research(药物评价研究), 2017, 40(6): 725-730.
[11] WEI FQ, ZHANG W, YANG Y.Implementation of US FDA's drug risk evaluation and mitigation strategies[J]. Chinese Journal of Pharmacovigilance(中国药物警戒), 2020, 17(12): 871-876.
[12] Govinfo. Congress of the United States. 21 USC 355-1[EB/OL].(2018)[2021-04-11]. https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/uscode/2018/.
[13] FDA. Administrative Committee of the Federal Register.21 CFR 200.5[EB/OL].(2016-04-01)[2021-04-11]. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?CFRPart=200&showFR=1&subpartNode=21:4.0.1.1.1.1.
[14] FDA. Guidance for industry and fda staff dear health care provider letters: improving communication of important Safety Information [EB/OL]. (2017-02-08)[2017-03-23]. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/dear-health-care-provider-letters-improving-communication-important-safety-information.
[15] FDA. Guidance for industry development and use of risk minimization action plans, risk MAP [EB/OL]. (2005-03) [2021-04-11]. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/development-and-use-risk-minimization-action-plans.
[16] European Medicines Agency. Guideline on good pharmacovigilance practices(GVP):module XV:Safety communication:rev.1[EB/OL].(2017-03-28)[2021-04-11]. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory/post-authorisation/pharmacovigilance/good-pharmacovigilance-practices.
[17] Health Products Regulatory Authority. COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines comirnaty and spikevax: risk of myocarditis and pericarditis[EB/OL].(2021-07-19)[2020-08-18]. important-safety-information-covid-19-mrna-vaccines-comirnaty-and-spikevax00f10f2697826eee9b55ff00008c97d0.pdf (hpra.ie).
[18] European Medicines Agency. Guideline on good pharmacovigilance practices(GVP):module XVI:Risk minimisation measures: selection of tools and effectiveness indicators:rev.2[EB/OL].(2017-10-09)[2021-04-11]. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory/post-authorisation/pharmacovigilance/good-pharmacovigilance-practices.