VAERS Explorer
Back to explore

Report #2884958

Received Feb 9, 2026

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
Unknown
Age
12 yrs
State
FL
Recovered
Unknown
Vaccinated
—
Onset
—
Days to onset
—
Hospital days
—

Vaccines (1)

TypeNameManufacturerDoseLotRoute / Site
IPVPOLIO VIRUS, INACT. (IPOL)SANOFI PASTEURUNK—OT

Symptoms (2)

Incorrect dose administeredNo adverse event

Symptom narrative

patient received 1 mL of IPOL instead of 0.5 mL with no reported adverse event; Initial information received on 05-Feb-2026 regarding an unsolicited valid non-serious case received from a physician. This case involves a 12 years old and unknown gender patient who received 1 ml of IPV (Vero) [IPOL] instead of 0.5 ml 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 1mL of suspect IPV (Vero), Suspension for injection (lot number, expiry date and strength not reported) via for Immunisation, instead of 0.5 ml with no reported adverse event (incorrect dose administered) (latency same day). Information on the batch number was requested corresponding to the one at time of event occurrence. It was reported "They were calling to ask what side effects they should be on the look out for. Doctor asked if there was anything that they should look out for? She asked if there was information regarding overdoses rather than extra doses and if there were any reports of anaphylaxis or anything life-threatening. She asked how long should she monitor the patient." 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.