Awareness among nurses about reporting of adverse drug reactions in Sweden

Abstract

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to investigate awareness among nurses regarding their new role as reporters of adverse drug reactions in Sweden and factors that may influence reporting by nurses.MethodsIn 2007, all nurses were included in the adverse drug reaction reporting scheme in Sweden. A questionnaire was sent to 753 randomly selected nurses in September 2010.ResultsOf the 453 (60%) responding nurses, 265 (58%) were aware that nurses were included in the reporting of adverse drug reactions. Sixty-one nurses (14%) stated that they had reported an adverse drug reaction. Fifteen percent (n = 70) of the respondents had received training about reporting of adverse drug reactions. Almost one third of these (n = 21, 30%) had reported an adverse drug reaction on at least one occasion. Among nurses without training, a smaller proportion (n = 40, 11%, P < 0.05) had reported an adverse drug reaction on at least one occasion. The two factors considered most important by nurses for reporting were the severity of the adverse drug reaction and if the reaction was to a newly approved drug. A majority of the nurses (n = 397, 88%) were interested in a training course in pharmacology as part of their ongoing professional development. One third (32%) of all nurses stated that one reason for not reporting a suspected adverse drug reaction was that the physician responsible did not regard the reaction necessary to report.ConclusionWe found that more than half of the study population of nurses in Sweden were aware of their new role as reporters of adverse drug reactions, but few of the responding nurses had reported an adverse drug reaction. Given that training seems to be associated with high reporting frequency, we suggest more training in pharmacovigilance for nurses.

Assessment of knowledge of pharmacovigilance among the nurses of tertiary care hospital

“…This was in contrast to the preference encountered in a study conducted by Ekman et al, 7 where 84% of the participants favored an Internet and computer based reporting. This may be due to the fact that Indian nurses were uncomfortable with technology.…”

“…This opinion was considerably less than one observed in a study conducted by Ekman et al, 7 where 58% of the nurses were aware that ADR reporting is an important aspect of nursing care. In a study conducted by Alan et al, 8 65% of nurses had encountered an ADR at least once.…”

Knowledge, attitude and practice of adverse drug reaction monitoring and reporting among nurses of secondary healthcare

“…[15][16][17][18][19] As for as observation of ADR was concerned, our study (72.5%) showed similar results as Joseph et al (73.3%). The information of similar data was lacking as other studies have not highlighted this observation.…”

“…Several studies have come out with varied outcome. In our study reporting of ADR was 45% similar to Sivanandy et al (45%) while it was 8% in Fisun et al, 9% in Sameyah et al, 14% in Ekman et al and as high as 75% in Joseph et al [15][16][17][18][19] This clearly shows the disparity in practice component which tells the need to understand the intricacies associated with reporting of ADR.…”

Peer Teaching with Root Cause Analysis Method in Increasing Obedience Reporting of Patient Safety Incident

“…Research conducted by Ekman, Petersson, Tågerud, and Bäckström (2012) reporting that there are still nurses who not report the undesirable incident of drug side effects of about 32% (n = 453), those resulted due to the impression of assuming this condition as an insignificant mentioned to be reported. In addition to this, there is about 88% (n = 453) of nurses who are very interest to get a training about pharmacology in the case of security and monitoring of prevention of drug side effects because it can develop their career.…”