Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Editorials

First do no harm: valproate and medicines safety in pregnancy

John Robson, Ngawai Moss, Patricia McGettigan, Samantha Jane Beardsley, Elizabeth Lovegrove and Carol Dezateux
British Journal of General Practice 2020; 70 (699): 477-478. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp20X712673
John Robson
Institute of Population Health Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London.
Roles: Reader in Primary Care
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ngawai Moss
Institute of Population Health Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London.
Roles: Honorary Research Fellow and Women’s Health Advocate
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Patricia McGettigan
William Harvey Research Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London.
Roles: Reader in Clinical Pharmacology and Medical Education
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Samantha Jane Beardsley
Institute of Population Health Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London.
Roles: GP Specialty Trainee
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Elizabeth Lovegrove
Institute of Population Health Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London.
Roles: GP Specialty Trainee
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Carol Dezateux
Institute of Population Health Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London.
Roles: Professor of Clinical Epidemiology and Health Data Science
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

INTRODUCTION

On 8 July 2020, following a 2-year independent inquiry, Baroness Julia Cumberlege published her report First Do No Harm,1 looking into sodium valproate, pelvic mesh, and Primodos oral pregnancy tests, and the resulting harm to women and their children: ‘We have found that the healthcare system ... is disjointed, siloed, unresponsive and defensive. It does not adequately recognise that patients are its raison d’etre. It has failed to listen to their concerns and when, belatedly, it has decided to act it has too often moved glacially.’ 1

The report is highly relevant to medicines safety in relation to women’s health and pregnancy. This editorial concentrates on valproate, a medicine prescribed by GPs, with relevance for other commonly prescribed teratogenic medicines. Primodos is no longer used but there will be women cared for in general practice, including those affected by pelvic mesh use, for whom this report is also highly relevant.

The 268-page report documents the protracted history of harms of valproate with similarities to thalidomide, which affected 10 000 surviving children worldwide.2 Thalidomide is now part of an historic lesson online at the Science Museum, and similarities with valproate are striking.2 Valproate, licensed in 1972 despite early concerns of teratogenicity, had clear evidence of physical malformations by 1984, with over 20 000 exposed pregnancies to date in the UK alone.1 Forty per cent of these were likely to have been associated with significant neurodevelopmental or physical harm to the children.1 The report highlights themes common to both tragedies including early signals of concern, multiple and systematic organisational failures, including pharma industries and their regulators, and the determined groups of affected women and their advocates, who persisted over many years to have their voices and concerns adequately addressed.

RISK REVIEWS FOR OTHER MEDICINES IN PREGNANCY

Women’s experiences of living with epilepsy or bipolar disorder are often complex, with care typically split between multiple agencies.3 The report reminds GPs that their role as an advocate for the patient is critical; conveying risks and pregnancy protection, navigating patients in fragmented systems, or supporting patients once the worst has occurred.

Shared decision making requires support for proactive engagement of patients in their own management as early as possible in the therapeutic journey and at all ages. The report recommends improved care pathways and completion of an ‘Annual Acknowledgement of Risk’ form for all medication considered to have teratogenic potential prescribed to women or girls with childbearing potential. Commonly used potential teratogens include ACE inhibitors,4,5 carbamazepine, carbimazole, lithium, and oral isotretinoin.6 It is estimated that annually 1 in 500 pregnant women are exposed to oral isotretinoin.7 Although the UK Teratology Information Service maintains a list of teratogenic medicines,8 an agreed list of common teratogens with similar interventions to reduce pregnancy exposure in general practice remains an outstanding task for regulatory and professional bodies. The Royal College of Psychiatrists guidance now states that valproate should no longer be prescribed for psychiatric reasons to women and girls of childbearing potential.9

TRAINING AND LINKED RECORDS

Safer systems involve training of GPs, nurses, and pharmacists, as well as staff administering the underpinning systems, to ensure that complete annual reviews are recorded and maintained. Access to and visibility of both GP and hospital records is crucial as care is so often split between several clinicians. Better digitally integrated real-time record systems with improved communication for direct care can ensure that both clinicians and their patients are fully informed. As well as signed risk acknowledgement, the report recommends audio or video recording of conversations on consent should be added to the patient record and shared with them.1

COMMUNICATION, RECORDING, AND REVIEW OF RISK REDUCTION

Although the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) provides clear guidance for GPs on contraception for teratogenic medicines,10 there is evidence this is poorly recorded,11 and the Cumberlege report found a continuing lack of clarity about the roles, responsibilities, and organisation of routine care for women on valproate, including a clear process for risk counselling and contraceptive advice.1

Actionable care requires built-in, fail-safe procedures to avoid gaps in the system. Though valproate prescribing has substantially reduced since the 2017 MHRA warning, the extent to which potentially exposed women are reviewed is unknown.12 Our research,5 and that of others,11,13 suggests that systems for monitoring and review are seriously inadequate, with fewer than half of those taking potentially teratogenic medicine having any recorded information on risk or contraceptive advice. There is currently no national scheme to electronically monitor the completeness of such risk reviews or ensure the results are routinely available to GPs and patients. The report recommends inclusion of safety for all medicines with major teratogenic risk as part of the Quality and Outcomes Framework, or national enhanced service specifications to act as a record of performance and a focus for action.1 This requires major changes in current practice.

LONG-TERM MONITORING

The lack of long-term monitoring is a predominant thread throughout the report.1 While the yellow card system should be used to report possible pregnancy exposure, registers and long term built-in surveillance of children born to women taking such medicines would be more effective. This requires improved data collection and better use of existing data, including linkage to hospital and school records, and for longer term follow-up of women and their children. These actions need to align with European Medicines Agency recommendations,14 with alignment of data collection with European registries to facilitate large-scale studies.7,15

BUILDING A TRUSTED SYSTEM

Responding to the profound loss of trust, the report recommended the appointment of a patient safety commissioner to provide a focus for patient voices on safety, and a new independent redress agency to look at systemic failings, rather than blaming individuals. Improvements in MHRA safety, improved transparency of conflicts of interest, and specialist centres to support affected individuals were also recommended.1

For the parents of affected children, this report provides some recognition of their experience: ‘... we were given the wrong information … despite the facts being known and repeated requests for information … the result is devastating on us as a family.’ 1

However, trust will be contingent on the extent to which this report is implemented. For GPs this is a critical account of system failures in which their own advice and prescriptions are an integral part. While teratogenic medicines should be avoided wherever possible, where prescription is unavoidable there is a duty to ensure patients are fully informed and protected by appropriate contraception. It has taken 40 years to develop the current MHRA advice on valproate.10

The report recommends similar diligence for a wider range of potential teratogens. GPs may wish to review their current procedures for improved communication and safer care so that the next time they prescribe valproate or other potentially teratogenic medicine, including ACE inhibitors, carbamazepine, carbimazole, lithium, or oral isotretinoin to a girl or woman, the patient and their clinical team can be assured this will occur in the context of a system they can trust.1

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to GPs and patients in East London for sharing their data for earlier studies on medicines safety in pregnancy.

Notes

Funding

This article arises from research on medicines optimisation and safety funded by Barts Charity (grant reference: MGU0419) and Health Data Research UK, an initiative funded by UK Research and Innovation, the Department of Health and Social Care (England) and the devolved administrations, and leading medical research charities. This research uses data provided by patients and collected by the NHS as part of their care and support. All authors are funded by their respective institutions and the views expressed represent those of the authors and not necessarily those of the institutions that support or employ them.

Provenance

Freely submitted; externally peer reviewed.

Competing interests

Ngawai Moss is an advocate for women’s health, who has supported research into epilepsy in pregnancy and is a member of Katie’s Team for Patient and Public Involvement in maternal health, Barts Research Centre for Women’s Health, Queen Mary University of London.

  • © British Journal of General Practice 2020

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Cumberlege J
    First do no harmThe report of the Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety (IMMDS) ReviewIMMDS2020
  2. 2.↵
    1. Science Museum
    ThalidomideScience Museum2019
  3. 3.↵
    1. Thangaratinam S,
    2. Marlin N,
    3. Newton S,
    4. et al.
    AntiEpileptic drug Monitoring in PREgnancy (EMPiRE): a double-blind randomised trial on effectiveness and acceptability of monitoring strategiesHealth Technol Assess201822231152
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Cooper WO,
    2. Hernandez-Diaz S,
    3. Arbogast PG,
    4. et al.
    Major congenital malformations after first-trimester exposure to ACE inhibitorsN Engl J Med20063542324432451
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Lovegrove E,
    2. McGettigan P,
    3. Robson J
    Pregnancy protection and pregnancies in women prescribed ACE inhibitors/ARBs: a cross sectional studyBr J Gen Pract2020https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp20X712997; In press.
  6. 6.↵
    1. Tomson T,
    2. Battino D,
    3. Bonizzoni E,
    4. et al.,
    5. EURAP Study Group
    Comparative risk of major congenital malformations with eight different antiepileptic drugs: a prospective cohort study of the EURAP registryLancet Neurol2018176530538
    OpenUrlPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Browne H,
    2. Mason M,
    3. Tang T
    Retinoids and pregnancy: an updateThe Obstetrician & Gynaecologist2014161711
    OpenUrl
  8. 8.↵
    1. UK Teratology Information Service (UKTIS)
    Maternal exposureUKTIS2015
  9. 9.↵
    1. Royal College of Psychiatrists
    Valproate in women and girls who could get pregnantRCPsych2018
  10. 10.↵
    1. Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)
    Information on the risks of valproate (epilim, depakote, convulex, episenta, epival, kentlim, orlept, sodium valproate, syonell, valpal & belvo) use in girls (of any age) and women of childbearing potential.MHRA2020
  11. 11.↵
    1. Paton C,
    2. Cookson J,
    3. Ferrier IN,
    4. et al.
    A UK clinical audit addressing the quality of prescribing of sodium valproate for bipolar disorder in women of childbearing ageBMJ Open201884e020450
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)
    Drug safety update: latest advice for medicines usersMHRA2017
  13. 13.↵
    1. Macfarlane A,
    2. Greenhalgh T
    Sodium valproate in pregnancy: what are the risks and should we use a shared decision-making approach?BMC Pregnancy Childbirth2018181200
    OpenUrl
  14. 14.↵
    1. European Medicines Agency (EMA)
    PRAC recommends new measures to avoid valproate exposure in pregnancyEMA2018
  15. 15.↵
    1. Blotière PO,
    2. Miranda S,
    3. Weill A,
    4. et al.
    Risk of early neurodevelopmental outcomes associated with prenatal exposure to the antiepileptic drugs most commonly used during pregnancy: a French nationwide population-based cohort studyBMJ Open2020106e034829
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 70 (699)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 70, Issue 699
October 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
First do no harm: valproate and medicines safety in pregnancy
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
First do no harm: valproate and medicines safety in pregnancy
John Robson, Ngawai Moss, Patricia McGettigan, Samantha Jane Beardsley, Elizabeth Lovegrove, Carol Dezateux
British Journal of General Practice 2020; 70 (699): 477-478. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp20X712673

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
First do no harm: valproate and medicines safety in pregnancy
John Robson, Ngawai Moss, Patricia McGettigan, Samantha Jane Beardsley, Elizabeth Lovegrove, Carol Dezateux
British Journal of General Practice 2020; 70 (699): 477-478. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp20X712673
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • INTRODUCTION
    • RISK REVIEWS FOR OTHER MEDICINES IN PREGNANCY
    • TRAINING AND LINKED RECORDS
    • COMMUNICATION, RECORDING, AND REVIEW OF RISK REDUCTION
    • LONG-TERM MONITORING
    • BUILDING A TRUSTED SYSTEM
    • Acknowledgments
    • Notes
    • REFERENCES
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Continuity of GP care: using personal lists in general practice
  • Creating space for gut feelings in the diagnosis of cancer in primary care
  • GP workforce crisis: what can we do now?
Show more Editorials

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2022 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242