VAERS Explorer
Back to explore

Report #2862179

Received Sep 30, 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
56 yrs
State
IN
Recovered
Unknown
Vaccinated
Sep 25, 2025
Onset
Sep 25, 2025
Days to onset
0
Hospital days
—

Vaccines (2)

TypeNameManufacturerDoseLotRoute / Site
FLU3INFLUENZA (SEASONAL) (FLUZONE)SANOFI PASTEURUNKUT8852JAOT / LA
PNC20PNEUMO (PREVNAR20)PFIZER\WYETHUNK—OT

Symptoms (3)

Extra dose administeredNo adverse eventWrong product administered

Symptom narrative

accidentally administered with FLUZONE NP twice instead of Prevnar20 with no reported adverse event; accidentally administered with FLUZONE NP twice instead of Prevnar20 with no reported adverse event; Initial information received on 25-Sep-2025 regarding an unsolicited valid non-serious case received from a other health professional. This case involves a 56 years old female patient who accidentally administered with influenza USP trival A-B subvirion NO preservative vaccine [fluzone] twice instead of pneumococcal vaccine conj 20V (CRM197) [Prevnar 20] with no reported adverse event. The patient's past medical history, medical treatment(s), vaccination(s) and family history were not provided. On 25-Sep-2025, the patient accidentally received 0.5 ml of suspect influenza USP trival A-B subvirion NO preservative vaccine Suspension for injection of standard strength, frequency once with lot UT8852JA and expiry date 30-JUN-2026 via intramuscular route in the left deltoid for Influenza twice instead of prevnar20 with no reported adverse event (extra dose administered) (wrong product administered) (Latency same day). Action taken was 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.