Perception of doctors towards Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) reporting: a cross sectional survey using a validated questionnaire

Nitin S. Kunnoor; Sharanabasappa Singanal; Lohit K.

doi:10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20174786

Authors

Nitin S. Kunnoor Department of Pharmacology, Mahadevappa Rampure Medical College and Hospital, Kalaburagi, Karnataka, India
Sharanabasappa Singanal Department of Pharmacology, Mahadevappa Rampure Medical College and Hospital, Kalaburagi, Karnataka, India
Lohit K. Department of Pharmacology, Sri Siddhartha Medical College, Tumkur, Karnataka, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20174786

Keywords:

Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR), Attitude, Knowledge, Doctors, Practice

Abstract

Background: Several studies have shown lack of sufficient knowledge and awareness among doctors on ADR reporting. Knowledge and attitude of doctors about ADR greatly influences extent of reporting. Identifying factors affecting ADR-reporting is vital to enable Pharmacovigilance teams to implement interventions to enhance rate and quality of reporting of ADRs. Hence, this study is done to evaluate perceptions of doctors towards ADR-reporting and to determine barriers for reporting ADR.

Methods: Cross sectional study conducted among doctors using a validated questionnaire to assess knowledge, attitude, practice and barriers for reporting ADRs. The questionnaire captured the demographic details, knowledge (14), attitudes (7) and practice pattern (4) towards pharmacovigilance. Descriptive statistics was used to assess the response among doctors.

Results: Of 157 doctors who responded to questionnaire, 90% of doctors were aware of pharmacovigilance program mainly through PVG activities by AMC and pharmacology classes. Only 47% doctors reported ADRs. The composite score on knowledge of ADR reporting and on knowledge of ADR burden was found to be moderate. 90% doctors opined ADR monitoring in hospital should be mandatory. 83% doctors opined ADR reporting by one person can make significant difference to community. One-third doctors felt there should be financial reward for ADR-reporting. In suspected cases, 57% doctors include ADR as differential diagnosis. 61% doctors said they will document ADR in patient file and 78% reports to AMC. More than one-third doctors don’t know where and how to report ADR. One-third doctors felt management of patients was more important than reporting ADR. Nearly one-fourth didn’t report fearing legal liabilities, difficulty diagnosing ADR and negative impact on doctors.

Conclusions: Knowledge about ADR-reporting and attitude towards it is adequate. But, because of many barriers, actual practice of ADR-reporting is unsatisfactory. Hence, Pharmacovigilance training is essential for doctors to promote and improve ADR-reporting.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Handbook of resolutions and decisions of the World Health Assembly and Executive Board WHA16.36 Clinical and Pharmacological Evaluation of Drugs, World Health Organization, Geneva; 1973: vol. 11948-1972.

Sachdev Y. Status of adverse drug reaction monitoring and pharmacovigilance in selected countries. Indian J Pharmacol. 2008;40:4-9.

Hazell L, Shakir SA. Under-reporting of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review. Drug Saf. 2006;29(5):385-96.

Shubha P, Jai Prakash R, Manjunath GN, Gautham MS, Naveen K. Adverse Drug Reaction reporting among medical and dental practitioners: a KAP study. Indian J of Med Spec. 2013;4(1):10-5.

Lopez - Gongalez E, Herdeiro MT, Figuerras A. Determinants of under-reporting of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review. Drug Saf. 2009;32(1):19-31,

Radhakrishnan R, Sudha V, Danturulu MV. An educational intervention to assess knowledge attitude practice of pharmacovigilance among health care professionals in an Indian tertiary care teaching hospital. Int J Pharm Tech Res. 2011;3:678-92.

Lohit K, Vidya KR, Manjunath GN. Development and Validation of Questionnaire to Assess the Knowledge, Attitude and Practice towards Adverse Drug Reactions Reporting among Healthcare Professionals. Journal of International Medicine and Dentistry. 2016;3(2):63-72.

Kharkar M, Bowalekar S. Knowledge, attitude and perception/practices (KAP) of medical practitioners in India towards adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting. PerspectClin Res. 2012;3:90-4.

Ramesh M, Parthasarathi G. Adverse drug reactions reporting: attitudes and perceptions of medical practitioners. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2009;2:10-4.

Gupta P, Udupa A. Adverse drug reaction reporting and pharmacovigilance: Knowledge, attitudes and perceptions among resident doctors. J Pharm Sci Res. 2011;3:1064-9.

Ghosh S, Ali S, Chhabra L, Prasad C, Gupta A. Investigation of attitudes and perception of medical practitioners on adverse drug reaction reporting: a pilot study. T Ph Res. 2010;3:1-9.

Sencan N, Altinkaynak M, Ferah I, Ozyildirim A, Ceylan EM, Clark PM. The knowledge and attitudes of physicians and nurses toward adverse event reporting and the effect of pharmacovigilance training: A hospital experience. Hacettepe University J Faculty Pharm. 2010;30(1):25-40.

Green CF, Mottram DR, Rowe PH, Pirmohamed M. Attitudes and knowledge of hospital pharmacists to adverse drug reaction reporting. Br J ClinPharmacol. 2001;51(1):81-6.

Khan SA, Goyal C, Chandel N, Rafi M. Knowledge, attitude and practice of doctors to adverse drug reaction reporting in a teaching hospital in India: An observational study. J Nat Sci Biol Med. 2013;4:191- 6.

Remesh A. Identifying the reasons for under reporting of ADR: A cross sectional survey. Res J Pharm BiolChem Sci. 2012;3:1379-86.