Symptomtext
two doses of PENTACEL were administered, only the HIB portion given, and it was thought to be reconstituted with sterile water with no reported adverse event; Initial information received on 14-Aug-2023 regarding an unsolicited valid non-serious case received from a other health professional. This case involves 2 patients who were administered diphtheria/tetanus/5 hybrid AC pertussis/IPV(VERO)/HIB(PRP/T) vaccine [Pentacel (Vero)], only the HIB portion given, and it was thought to be reconstituted with sterile water with no reported adverse event. The patient's past medical history, medical treatment(s), vaccination(s) and family history were not provided. On an unknown date, the patients received a dose of suspect diphtheria/tetanus/5 hybrid AC pertussis/IPV(VERO)/HIB(PRP/T) vaccine Suspension for injection (lot UJ876AA) (with an unknown strength, dosage and expiry date) via unknown route in unknown administration site for Immunization, only the HIB portion given, and it was thought to be reconstituted with sterile water with no reported adverse event (product preparation error) (latency- same day). Reportedly, Caller reporting two doses of PENTACEL were administered, only the HIB portion given, and it was thought to be reconstituted with sterile water. Caller reporting, they had 2 extra doses of the DTAP/IPV, which led them to believe 2 patients were given only the HIB. Caller reporting, they are unsure which patients affected, they have narrowed it down to 4, meaning 2 of the 4 receiving only HIB/sterile water and the other 2 patients received the full dose of PENTACEL. caller that the two patients who received the doses with HIB reconstituted with sterile water would not be counted as a valid dose. Caller then asked if they need to be repeated. Action taken was not applicable. At time of reporting, the outcome was Unknown for the event. This suspected adverse reaction report is submitted and classified as a medication error solely and exclusively to ensure the marketing authorization holder's compliance with the requirements set out in the Directive 2001/83/EC and Module VI of the Good Pharmacovigilance Practices. The classification as a medical error is in no way intended, nor should it be interpreted or construed as an allegation or claim made by the marketing authorization holder that any third party has contributed to or is to be held liable for the occurrence of this medication error.