Breaking barriers: a study on knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Materiovigilance among healthcare workers in Central India
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20260437Keywords:
Materiovigilance, MvPI, Medical device adverse events, Knowledge attitudes and practices, Healthcare professionals, Patient safetyAbstract
Background: Materiovigilance (Mv) plays a crucial role in patient safety, as medical device adverse events (MDAE) and its reporting and monitoring will help to ensure safety of patient. Healthcare professionals’ awareness and participation, however, remain suboptimal despite implementation of Mv program of India (MvPI) in 2015. An in-depth understanding of their knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) is key to bridging gap between policy and practice.
Methods: This was an observational, cross-sectional study using a survey on Google Forms sent through social networks. The survey comprised 22 questions related to KAP regarding Mv. Survey responses were obtained from healthcare professionals in Central India. Data were analysed to identify trends and gaps in awareness and engagement.
Results: The 344 out of 500 doctors, Postgraduate residents responded, yielding a response rate of 68.8%. A total of 91.8% accepted adverse event caused by medical devices, and 82.5% accepted that it is responsibility for healthcare professionals to report the events. Despite of having encountered adverse events related to medical device in practice 73.8%, a minor proportion, 25.6%, reported adverse events, while 85.5% showed willingness to report.
Conclusions: Preliminary findings suggest limited awareness among healthcare professionals about MvPI and its reporting protocols. A significant gap exists in their knowledge and practices, underscoring the need for targeted awareness campaigns and training to enhance reporting of MDAEs.
Metrics
References
Sapkota B, Palaian S, Shrestha S, Ibrahim MI. Materiovigilance in perspective: Understanding its concept and practice in the global healthcare system. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2023;57(4):886-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-023-00514-4
Jefferys DB. The regulation of medical devices and the role of the Medical Devices Agency. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2001;52(2):229-35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0306-5251.2001.01416.x
Maisel WH. Medical device regulation: An introduction for the practicing physician. Ann Intern Med. 2004;140(4):296-302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-140-4-200402170-00012
Gagliardi AR, Ducey A, Lehoux P, Smith J, Brown K, Lee M, et al. Factors influencing the reporting of adverse medical device events: Qualitative interviews with physicians about higher risk implantable devices. BMJ Qual Saf. 2018;27:190-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2017-006481
Shukla S, Gupta M, Pandit S, Mishra R, Bansal A, Singh P, et al. Implementation of adverse event reporting for medical devices, India. Bull World Health Organ. 2020;98(3):206-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.19.232785
Fouretier A, Bertram D. New regulations on medical devices in Europe: What to expect? Expert Rev Med Devices. 2014;11(4):351-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1586/17434440.2014.916209
Saranraj K, Usha Kiran P. A study assessing the knowledge, attitude, and practice of materiovigilance among medical professionals in Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh. Int J Basic Clin Pharmacol. 2024;13(3):364-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20240993
European Commission. Medical Devices Directive 93/42/EEC. J European Communities. 1993.
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. Medical Devices Rules, 2017. Gazette Notification; 31 January 2017.
Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission. Materiovigilance Programme of India-Guidance Document Version 1.2. Ghaziabad: IPC. 2015.
Indian Pharmacopoeia Commission. Materiovigilance Programme of India (IPC-MvPI) as Certification Body for ICMED 9000 and ICMED 13485. 2024. Available at: https://www.ipc.gov.in/news-highlights/1296-indian-pharmacopoeia-commission-%E2%80%93-materiovigilance-programme-of-india-ipc-mvpi-as-certification-body-for-icmed-9000-and-icmed-13485.html. Accessed on 15 January 2026.
Sojitra B, Patel C, Pandya S, Shah R, Mehta K, Joshi P, et al. Knowledge, attitude, and practice of materiovigilance among healthcare professionals at a tertiary care teaching hospital. Cureus. 2024;16(7):e64978. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.64978
Panchal YN, Vyas BM, Suthar KM, Shah KN. A study of assessing knowledge, attitude, and practice of materiovigilance among medical surgeons of Gujarat. Natl J Physiol Pharm Pharmacol. 2022;12(11):1792-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5455/njppp.2022.12.03103202207032022
Meher BR, Padhy BM, Srinivasan A, Mohanty RR. Awareness, attitude, and practice of materiovigilance among medical professionals at a tertiary care institute of national importance: A cross-sectional study. Perspect Clin Res. 2022;13(2):94-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.PICR_187_19
Medical Device and Diagnostics. CDSCO. 2023. Available at: https://cdsco.gov.in/opencms/opencms/en/Medical-Device-Diagnostics/Medical-Device-Diagnostics/. Accessed on 15 January 2026.
International Medical Device Regulators Forum. IMDRF. Available at: https://www.imdrf.org/. Accessed on 15 January 2026.
Central Drugs Standard Control Organization. Reporting tools and SOPs for MvPI. CDSCO. 2020.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
