VAERS Explorer
Back to explore

Report #2830955

Received Mar 12, 2025

A note on interpretation. VAERS reports are unverified and may be incomplete or coincidental. A report does not establish that a vaccine caused an event, and counts should not be used to calculate incidence or infer causation. Full disclaimer

Overview

Sex
Female
Age
4 yrs
State
MD
Recovered
Unknown
Vaccinated
—
Onset
—
Days to onset
—
Hospital days
—

Vaccines (2)

TypeNameManufacturerDoseLotRoute / Site
DTAPDTAP (DAPTACEL)SANOFI PASTEURUNK—OT
TDAPTDAP (ADACEL)SANOFI PASTEUR5—OT

Symptoms (2)

No adverse eventWrong product administered

Symptom narrative

The patient was given Tdap [ADACEL] instead of DTaP [DAPTACEL] as the fifth dose in the supposed 5 dose-series of DTaP with no reported adverse event; Initial information received on 11-Mar-2025 regarding an unsolicited valid non-serious case received from a other health professional. This case involves a 4 years old female patient who was given tdap (Diphtheria-2/Tetanus/5 Ac Pertussis Vaccine) [adacel] instead of dtap (Diphtheria-15/Tetanus/5 Ac Pertussis Vaccine) [daptacel] as the fifth dose in the supposed 5 dose-series of dtap 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 patient received a dose 5 of suspect Diphtheria-2/Tetanus/5 Ac Pertussis Vaccine Suspension for injection (strength, dose, batch and expiry date unknown) via unknown route in unknown administration site for immunization instead of dtap [daptacel] as the fifth dose in the supposed 5 dose-series of dtap with no reported adverse event (wrong product administered) (same day latency). Information on batch number and expiry date corresponding to the one at time of event occurrence was requested. Action taken: not applicable. 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.