Factors Influencing Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting in New South Wales Teaching Hospitals

Abstract

Aim: To identify predisposing and enabling factors which influence adverse drug reaction reporting by medical, nursing and pharmacy staff in New South Wales teaching hospitals. Method: A questionnaire was distributed to all doctors, nurses and pharmacists in four New South Wales teaching hospitals. Health promotion concepts were used to provide a framework for interpreting results. Results: 4808 questionnaires were distributed and 1125 (23% response rate) were returned. Approximately 16% of respondents reported that they had reported an adverse drug reaction at least once to the Australian Adverse Drug Reactions Advisory Committee. 82% routinely asked patients about previous adverse drug reactions on admission and 95% of these respondents documented the adverse drug reaction in the medical record. Only 36% knew how to report an adverse drug reaction in their hospital. Most claimed awareness of recognised goals of adverse drug reaction reporting but many also identified erroneous goals. They were more likely to report an adverse drug reaction if it was serious or related to a new product. Predisposing factors relating to knowledge were identified as barriers to reporting by about one-third of respondents. Factors relating to attitudes and beliefs were not identified as barriers. Disabling factors included excessive workload, forms not readily available and insufficient data. Conclusion: Knowledge appears to be a greater influence on adverse drug reaction reporting than attitudes and beliefs. Simple enabling processes, such as making forms more accessible or encouraging computerised reporting, might result in more reports. Educational initiatives should target nurses and junior medical officers.

Predictors of Nurses Reporting Practice Related to Adverse Drug Reaction at Felegehiwot Referral Hospital and Felegehiwot Referral Hospital and University of Gondar Teaching Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia

“…These included is through training 106(49.5%). Several studies also agreed (24,29,(44)(45)(46), continuing education on pharmacovigillance 61(28.5%), incentives 15(7.0%) studies supported were (19,47). Apart from the fact that the use of incentives have not been widely accepted and practiced, it raises the possibility of overreporting by some health care workers in a bid to obtain financial rewards.…”

Adverse drug event reporting by pharmacists: a systematic literature review

“…However, some studies show statistically significant differences between the healthcare professionals. Among studies that included other healthcare professionals, pharmacists were more likely to see an ADE and more likely to be aware about the existence of pharmacovigilance centres and reporting forms compared to doctors and nurses . No difference in the mean knowledge/attitudes was found between the three healthcare professional in some studies or reporting rate .…”

“…Compared to pharmacy technicians, pharmacist found to have better knowledge of and attitudes towards ADE reporting . In a study conducted among HCPs in South Wales teaching hospitals, the majority of doctors and nurses indicated that the ward pharmacists are their main source of information about ADRs . However, a recent study from Ethiopia found that less than 7% of the surveyed HCPs used pharmacists as a source of information about ADRs …”

“…No difference in the mean knowledge/attitudes was found between the three healthcare professional in some studies or reporting rate . However, other studies found that pharmacists have better knowledge of ADEs than nurses and pharmacists have better mean knowledge score compared to physicians . One study found that pharmacist prescribers were more likely to report ADE than nurse prescribers .…”

Decision tree-based expert system for adverse drug reaction detection using fuzzy logic and genetic algorithm

“…Knowing the factors that may confirm an adverse event will assist heath providers and physicians in establishing ways to correct underreporting. Different reasons that need to be analyzed in order to improve the quality of reporting [21]. There are huge numbers of reports that are available in the databases.…”