VAERS Explorer
Back to explore

Report #2868422

Received Oct 27, 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
7 yrs
State
MI
Recovered
Unknown
Vaccinated
Oct 17, 2025
Onset
Oct 17, 2025
Days to onset
0
Hospital days
—

Vaccines (1)

TypeNameManufacturerDoseLotRoute / Site
IPVPOLIO VIRUS, INACT. (IPOL)SANOFI PASTEUR4Y1A212MOT / LA

Symptoms (2)

Incorrect dose administeredNo adverse event

Symptom narrative

administered what they thought was the 10th dose from an IPOL MDV to a patient today, 17Oct2025. However, they realized the dose was actually the 11th dose pulled from the vial, with no reported adverse event; Initial information received on 17-Oct-2025 regarding an unsolicited valid non-serious case received from a nurse. This case involves a 7 year old female patient who was administered IPV (VERO) [IPOL] that they thought was the 10th dose but it was actually the 11th dose pulled from the vial, with no reported adverse event. The patient's past medical history, medical treatment(s), vaccination(s) and family history were not provided. On 17-Oct-2025, the patient received a 0.5ml (dose 4) of suspect IPV (VERO) standard strength, frequency-once (lot Y1A212M and expiry date-31-Jan-2027) via intramuscular route in left arm for Immunization what they thought was the 10th dose but it was actually the 11th dose pulled from the vial, with no reported adverse event (incorrect dose 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.