Literature DB >> 22201474

Expectations for feedback in adverse drug reporting by healthcare professionals in the Netherlands.

Ingrid Oosterhuis1, Florence P A M van Hunsel, Eugène P van Puijenbroek.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In 2010, the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb received more than 4000 reports from healthcare professionals (HCPs). All HCPs received individual personal feedback containing information about the reported drug-adverse drug reaction (ADR) association. It is unclear what type of information HCPs expect in this feedback letter.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to examine the expectations of the personal feedback of HCPs who reported an ADR to the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb.
METHODS: A questionnaire survey was conducted among a random sample of 1200 pharmacists, general practitioners (GPs) and medical specialists who reported an ADR to the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb between 1 January 2009 and 27 January 2010. Responders and non-responders were compared on the basis of profession, number of reports submitted to the pharmacovigilance since 2007 and their last report being serious or not. Questions were asked about the importance of personal feedback and the type of information reporters would like to see in their personal feedback. Both linear and logistic regression analysis were performed, with correction for possible confounding factors.
RESULTS: The response rate to the questionnaire was 34.6% (n = 399). The type of information the respondents generally would like to see in their personal feedback is information about the time course of the ADR and information about the pharmacological mechanism. However, GPs were, in general, less interested in receiving feedback than pharmacists and medical specialists. Most of the respondents were (very) unsatisfied if they received only a confirmation letter instead of personal feedback. Personalized feedback was considered to be (very) important for reporting an ADR in the future. Most of the respondents (80.3%) stated that the personal feedback increased their knowledge. Only 0.6% of respondents had not read the personalized feedback. No differences were found between responders and non-responders, with the exception that responders had reported statistically more often to the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb in the past 3 years.
CONCLUSIONS: Most of the respondents would like personal feedback instead of a standard confirmation letter. In general, pharmacists and medical specialists would like more information than GPs. The information in this study is useful in generating more customized personal feedback in the future, and could be useful for other pharmacovigilance centres that are interested in writing personalized feedback to make available to reporters.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22201474     DOI: 10.2165/11594910-000000000-00000

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Drug Saf        ISSN: 0114-5916            Impact factor:   5.606


  19 in total

1.  Attitudes to reporting adverse drug reactions in northern Sweden.

Authors:  M Bäckström; T Mjörndal; R Dahlqvist; T Nordkvist-Olsson
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 2.953

2.  Physicians' knowledge and attitudes regarding the spontaneous reporting system for adverse drug reactions.

Authors:  J Hasford; M Goettler; K-H Munter; B Müller-Oerlinghausen
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Reasons for reporting adverse drug reactions--some thoughts based on an international review.

Authors:  C Biriell; I R Edwards
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 2.890

4.  Physicians' attitudes and adverse drug reaction reporting : a case-control study in Portugal.

Authors:  Maria T Herdeiro; Adolfo Figueiras; Jorge Polónia; Juan Jesus Gestal-Otero
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 5.606

5.  Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires.

Authors:  Caroline B Terwee; Sandra D M Bot; Michael R de Boer; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Dirk L Knol; Joost Dekker; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2006-08-24       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  Expectations of general practitioners and specialist doctors regarding the feedback received after reporting an adverse drug reaction.

Authors:  Lotte Cornelissen; Eugène van Puijenbroek; Kees van Grootheest
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 2.890

7.  Reporting of adverse drug reactions may be influenced by feedback to the reporting doctor.

Authors:  Susanna M Wallerstedt; Gertrud Brunlöf; Marie-Louise Johansson; Carina Tukukino; Lars Ny
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2007-03-09       Impact factor: 2.953

8.  Attitudes among hospital physicians to the reporting of adverse drug reactions in Sweden.

Authors:  Elisabet Ekman; M Bäckström
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2008-09-30       Impact factor: 2.953

Review 9.  Pharmacovigilance in New Zealand: the role of the New Zealand Pharmacovigilance Centre in facilitating safer medicines use.

Authors:  Desiree L Kunac; Mira Harrison-Woolrych; Michael V Tatley
Journal:  N Z Med J       Date:  2008-10-03

10.  Reporting of adverse drug reactions by general practitioners: a questionnaire-based study in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Anneke Passier; Marije ten Napel; Kees van Grootheest; Eugène van Puijenbroek
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 5.606

View more
  5 in total

1.  A Qualitative Study of Stakeholders' Views on Pharmacovigilance System, Policy, and Coordination in Pakistan.

Authors:  Muhammad Akhtar Abbas Khan; Saima Hamid; Shahzad Ali Khan; Mariyam Sarfraz; Zaheer-Ud-Din Babar
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2022-06-09       Impact factor: 5.988

2.  Joint medicine-information and pharmacovigilance services could improve detection and communication about drug-safety problems.

Authors:  Jan Schjøtt; Jenny Bergman
Journal:  Drug Healthc Patient Saf       Date:  2014-07-01

3.  Patient preferences and expectation for feedback on adverse drug reaction reports submitted in Ghana.

Authors:  George Tsey Sabblah; Delese Darko; Linda Härmark; Eugène van Puijenbroek
Journal:  Ghana Med J       Date:  2019-06

4.  Patient Organizations' Barriers in Pharmacovigilance and Strategies to Stimulate Their Participation.

Authors:  Katherine Chinchilla; Cristiano Matos; Victoria Hall; Florence van Hunsel
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2020-09-28       Impact factor: 5.606

5.  Increasing Patient Engagement in Pharmacovigilance Through Online Community Outreach and Mobile Reporting Applications: An Analysis of Adverse Event Reporting for the Essure Device in the US.

Authors:  Chi Y Bahk; Melanie Goshgarian; Krystal Donahue; Clark C Freifeld; Christopher M Menone; Carrie E Pierce; Harold Rodriguez; John S Brownstein; Robert Furberg; Nabarun Dasgupta
Journal:  Pharmaceut Med       Date:  2015-08-05
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.