OBJECTIVE: To investigate the knowledge about ADRs and ADR reporting among healthcare professionals working at four regional pharmacovigilance centers (RPCs) of Nepal. METHODS: It was a cross sectional study, done by a survey using a validated self-administered structured questionnaire. The questionnaire was distributed to 450 healthcare professionals working at four RPCs. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 74%. Only 53% and 38% of respondents knew about the existence of National Pharmacovigilance Centre (NPC) and RPC, respectively. Among the respondents, 29% and 33% did not know what a Type A and Type B ADR was. Similarly, 30% and 45% were not aware of the common types of ADRs or the thalidomide tragedy. Only, 9% knew about Uppsala Monitoring Centre (UMC) and only 10% answered correctly about the Naranjo algorithm as a causality assessment tool for ADRs. Of the respondents, only 19% knew about spontaneous reporting system and only 18% were aware about its drawbacks. The overall mean score on knowledge about ADR among healthcare professionals was 7.64 ± 2.38 out of the maximum possible score of 12. Whereas, the overall mean score of knowledge about ADR reporting was 3.95 ± 1.78 out of maximum possible score of 11. CONCLUSION: Healthcare professionals working at four RPCs of Nepal have some knowledge about ADRs themselves but limited knowledge about ADR reporting. There is an urgent need of action to be taken by RPCs at the regional level and NPC at the national level to improve knowledge and ADR reporting by healthcare professionals.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the knowledge about ADRs and ADR reporting among healthcare professionals working at four regional pharmacovigilance centers (RPCs) of Nepal. METHODS: It was a cross sectional study, done by a survey using a validated self-administered structured questionnaire. The questionnaire was distributed to 450 healthcare professionals working at four RPCs. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 74%. Only 53% and 38% of respondents knew about the existence of National Pharmacovigilance Centre (NPC) and RPC, respectively. Among the respondents, 29% and 33% did not know what a Type A and Type B ADR was. Similarly, 30% and 45% were not aware of the common types of ADRs or the thalidomide tragedy. Only, 9% knew about Uppsala Monitoring Centre (UMC) and only 10% answered correctly about the Naranjo algorithm as a causality assessment tool for ADRs. Of the respondents, only 19% knew about spontaneous reporting system and only 18% were aware about its drawbacks. The overall mean score on knowledge about ADR among healthcare professionals was 7.64 ± 2.38 out of the maximum possible score of 12. Whereas, the overall mean score of knowledge about ADR reporting was 3.95 ± 1.78 out of maximum possible score of 11. CONCLUSION: Healthcare professionals working at four RPCs of Nepal have some knowledge about ADRs themselves but limited knowledge about ADR reporting. There is an urgent need of action to be taken by RPCs at the regional level and NPC at the national level to improve knowledge and ADR reporting by healthcare professionals.
Authors: Theophilus A Adegbuyi; Joseph O Fadare; Ebisola J Araromi; Abayomi O Sijuade; Iyanu Bankole; Ilesanmi K Fasuba; Rachel A Alabi Journal: Hosp Pharm Date: 2020-09-18