Objectives: Pharmacovigilance in Pakistan needs robust preference in terms of implementation and consistent movement of structured approaches. The objective of this study is to explore the knowledge, attitude and barriers towards adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting among physicians and pharmacists and to explore the encouraging factors of ADR reporting. Methods: The current research was a cross-sectional study design in which a pre-validated questionnaire was administered to physicians and pharmacists in Abbottabad, Pakistan. The study was conducted for two months from January 2016 to February 2016. Results: A total of 194 physicians and pharmacists responded with a response rate of 35.3%. All the respondents either strongly agreed or agreed that ADRs reporting is a part of their duty. Half of the respondents agreed that monitoring of drug safety is important. Around three quarters of respondents (74.2%) stated that they did not report ADRs due to unavailability of reporting forms while 70% cited lack of a proper pharmacovigilance center as one of the key barriers. Half of the respondents (52.2%) did not report due to their insufficient knowledge. A large majority (81.8%) said that they would report ADRs if there is pharmacovigilance center. On the point of incentives, opinion seems to be divided. Slightly less than half (47.8%) cited their wish to have few incentives while the remaining 52.2% either preferred to be neutral or disagreed. Conclusion: Based on the study findings, barriers were mostly related to general unfamiliarity with ADRs reporting guidelines and the non-existence of a pharmacovigilance center. It is highlighted that the regulatory body should carve a niche for a properly functional pharmacovigilance center and initiate educational programs for strengthening knowledge and attitudes towards ADR reporting.

No abstract

Rationale: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, many hospitals have reduced in-hospital visitation. In these situations, virtual communication tools have helped maintain interaction between parties. The Frontline Connect program was designed to address communication and patient care challenges by providing dataenabled devices to clinical staff in hospitals.Objective: This study aimed to identify areas of improvement for the Frontline Connect program by: (a) evaluating communication needs, user experience, and program satisfaction; and (b) identifying potential barriers to device access or use. Methods:We administered pre-implementation needs assessment, post-use, and exit surveys to healthcare staff at a pilot hospital site in Ontario. Recruitment was through email lists and site champions using convenience sampling. We descriptively analysed survey responses and compared the initial need statements to postimplementation use-cases identified by users.Results: We received 139 needs assessments, 31 user experience assessments, and 47 exit survey responses. Most device use occurred in the emergency department and intensive care units and was facilitated by social workers, nurses, and physicians to connect patients, families, and care providers. Pre-implementation concerns were related to infection control, data security, and device privacy. In the exit survey, these were replaced by other concerns including Internet connectivity and timeintensiveness. Device utility and ease-of-use were rated 9.7/10 and 9.6/10 respectively in the user experience survey, though overall experience was rated 7.2/10 in the exit survey. Overall, respondents viewed the devices as useful and we agree with participants who suggested increased program promotion and training would likely improve adoption. Conclusions:We found that our virtual technology program for facilitating communication was positively perceived. Survey feedback indicates that a rapid rollout in response to urgent pandemic-related needs was feasible, though program logistics

A 3 4 7 -A 7 6 6 A633 PHC reported its HRQoL. Pain/Discomfort (50.7%) and Anxiety/Depression (38.8%) were dimensions in which users reported more often some problem. About 10% of users reported extreme problems in these dimensions. A worse HRQoL was significantly associated with the following factors: women (β = -0,012); stroke (β = -0,106), arthritis, osteoarthritis or rheumatism (β = -0,086), depression (β = -0,079), heart diseases (β = -0,032); diet to lose weight (β = -0,014); diet to reduce fat intake (β = -0,017); health self-assessment as poor or very poor (β = -0,239); the use of alcoholic beverage once or more per month (β = -0,020). A greatest HRQoL was significantly associated with the following factors: users residing in the North and the Southeast (β = 0,049; β = 0,032), the practice of physical activity (β = 0,019), and better level of education. There was no association with HRQoL and factors related to health services. ConClusions: These findings show that the HRQoL of the users of PHC of SUS was influenced by demographic, socioeconomic, health-related conditions and lifestyle factors. Users with stroke had significantly lower HRQoL. Thus, the HRQoL can be an important measure for promoting health and comprehensive health care to users of SUS.