A PHARMACOVIGILANCE STUDY EXAMINING CLINICIANS' KNOWLEDGE ATTITUDES AND PRACTICE ON REPORTING ADVERSE DRUG REACTIONS

Main Article Content

Dr Ashutosh Roy
Dr Harshali Bharat Rankhambe
Dr Anubhuti Khare
Dr K Raghavendra Dev

Keywords

Adverse drug reaction, Pharmacovigilance, Knowledge, Attitude, Practice

Abstract

Background and objectives: The role of Clinicians is very essential in reporting and tracking adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to build an international database that guarantees pharmaceutical safety. However, a major problem exists when it comes to under-reporting suspected ADRs, especially in countries like India where healthcare professionals are not aware about the problem. Study was carried out at tertiary care hospital in India, the current study sought to evaluate the physicians' knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) about ADR self-reporting.


Method: 120 clinicians were included in the present study from single tertiary care hospital. This study was cross-sectional, observational, and questionnaire-based; participating physicians were drawn from multiple clinical departments.  This questionnaire-based research aimed to gather demographic data and details on doctors' awareness of, attitudes toward, and perceptions of reporting adverse events.


Results: The average time spent by doctors to finish answering the questionnaire was found to be fifteen minutes. From the total number of participants in the research (n = 120), 54% were postgraduate physicians and 46% were graduates. ADR reporting is essential and would help the patient, according to 92% of respondents. ADR reporting is a professional duty for physicians, according to 74% of respondents.


Conclusion: The current research concluded that most medical professionals recognized the need for reporting and had excellent knowledge and attitudes about pharmacovigilance. Nevertheless, the reporting rate was quite low. An interactive training program is required to raise healthcare workers' knowledge of reporting ADRs

Abstract 75 | pdf Downloads 30

References

1. Ahmad A, Patel I, Balakrishnan R, Mohanta GP, Manna PK. An evaluation of knowledge, attitude, and practice of Indian pharmacists towards adverse drug reaction reporting: A pilot study. Perspectives in Clinical Research. 2013;4(4):204-10.
2. Olsson S. The role of the WHO Programme for International Drug Monitoring in coordinating worldwide drug safety efforts. Drug Saf. 1998;19(1):1-10.
3. Ahmad SR. Adverse drug event monitoring at the Food and Drug Administration. J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18(1):57-60.
4. Lexchin J. Is there still a role for spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions? Can Med Assoc J. 2006;174(2):191-2.
5. Lopez-Gonzalez E, Herdeiro MT, Figueiras A. Determinants of under-reporting of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review. Drug Saf. 2009;32(1):19-31.
6. Kamtane RA, Jayawardhani V. Knowledge, Attitude and Perception of Physicians towards Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) Reporting: A Pharmacoepidemiological Study. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2012;5(3):210-4.
7. Rajesh R, Vidyasagar S, Nandakumar K. Highly active antiretroviral therapy induced adverse drug reactions in Indian human immunodeficiency virus-positive patients. Pharmacy Practice. 2011;9(1):48- 55.
8. Perlik F, Slanar O, Smid M, Petracek J. Attitude of Czech physicians to adverse drug reaction reporting. Eur J Clin. Pharmacol. 2002;58(5):367-9.
9. Hasford J, Goettler M, Munter KH, Muller- Oerlinghausen B. Physicians' knowledge and attitudes regarding the spontaneous reporting system for adverse drug reactions. J Clin. Epidemiol. 2002;55(9):945-50.
10. Al-Arifi MN et al. Knowledge, Attitude and Perception of Physicians towards Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting at King Khalid University Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Tropic J Pharmaceutic Res. 2015;14(5):907-11.
11. Gupta P, Udupa A. Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting and Pharmacovigilance: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Perceptions amongst Resident Doctors. J Pharm Sci Res. 2011;3(2):1064-69.
12. Pimpalkhute SA, Jaiswal KM, Sontakke SD, Bajait CS, Gaikwad A. Evaluation of awareness about Pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reaction monitoring in tertiary care teaching hospital resident doctors. Indian J Med Sci. 2012;66(3):55- 61.
13. Reddy VL, Pasha SKJ, Rathinavelu M, Reddy YP. Assessment of Knowledge, Attitude, and Perception of Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) Reporting among the Pharmacy Students in South India. IOSR J Pharmacy Biologic Sci. 2014;9(2):34-43.
14. Gupta SK, Nayak RP, Shivaranjani R, Vidyarthi SK. A questionnaire study on the knowledge, attitude, and practice of Pharmacovigilance among the healthcare professionals in a teaching hospital in South India. Perspect Clin Res. 2015;6(1):45-52.
15. Datta S, Sengupta S. An evaluation of knowledge, attitude, and practice of adverse drug reaction reporting in a tertiary care teaching hospital of Sikkim. Perspectives in Clinical Res. 2015;6(4):200-206.
16. Desai CK, Iyer G, Panchal J, Shah S, Dikshit RK. An evaluation of knowledge, attitude, and practice of adverse drug reaction reporting among prescribers at a tertiary care hospital. Perspectives in Clinical Research. 2011;2(4);129-36.
17. Kalaiselvan V, Prasad T, Bisht A, Singh S, Singh GN. Adverse drug reactions reporting culture in Pharmacovigilance Programme of India. Ind J Medic Res. 2014;140(4):563-4.
18. Khan SA, Goyal C, Chandel N, Rafi M. Knowledge, attitudes, and practice of doctors to adverse drug reaction reporting in a teaching hospital in India: An observational study. J Natural Sci Biol Medic. 2013;4(1):191-6.