» Articles » PMID: 23449824

A Survey on the Knowledge, Attitude and the Practice of Pharmacovigilance Among the Health Care Professionals in a Teaching Hospital in Northern India

Overview
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2013 Mar 2
PMID 23449824
Citations 22
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To assess the pharmacovigilance awareness among the healthcare professionals in a teaching hospital in Northern India.

Material And Methods: A questionnaire which was suitable for assessing the basic Knowledge, Attitude and the Practice (KAP) of pharmacovigilance was designed and distributed among 100 doctors of the Punjab Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) Hospital, Jalandhar, Punjab, India.

Results: Among the 100 doctors, 61 responded. The data was analyzed by using the SPSS statistical software. Although 77% of the subjects knew the term 'pharmacovigilance', only 59% were aware of the existence of the National Pharmacovigilance Program. 23% volunteered to reports Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs), but more than 60% doctors did not know how and where to report the ADRs.

Conclusion: There is a need for a regular training and the reenforcement for the ADR reporting among the health care personnel. The perception of the reporting process being tedious, the lack of time, a poor knowledge on the reporting mechanism and inadequate expertise seemed to be the main reasons for not reporting the ADRs. A majority of the respondents suggested regular training sessions on a priority basis for the success of the pharmacovigilance program and for the better clinical management of the patients in general.

Citing Articles

Barriers to and facilitators of healthcare professionals in ADR reporting in a tertiary care hospital in India.

N I, Kp S, R J, Mg R BMC Health Serv Res. 2025; 25(1):166.

PMID: 39875957 PMC: 11773872. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-024-12139-w.


Awareness and Knowledge of Adverse Drug Reactions and Pharmacovigilance Among Medical and Nursing Students and Staff in a Tertiary Care Hospital.

Raikar S, Sneha S, G S, R J Cureus. 2024; 16(9):e69981.

PMID: 39445248 PMC: 11498074. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.69981.


Educational interventions in pharmacovigilance to improve the knowledge, attitude and the report of adverse drug reactions in healthcare professionals: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Cervantes-Arellano M, Castelan-Martinez O, Marin-Campos Y, Chavez-Pacheco J, Morales-Rios O, Ubaldo-Reyes L Daru. 2024; 32(1):421-434.

PMID: 38427161 PMC: 11087385. DOI: 10.1007/s40199-024-00508-z.


Pharmacovigilance practice among pediatric neurologists from Poland and Germany.

Kopciuch D, Kus K, Niskiewicz I, Flicinski J, Zaprutko T, Ratajczak P BMC Med Educ. 2023; 23(1):547.

PMID: 37528387 PMC: 10394771. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-023-04542-4.


Evaluation of health care professionals' knowledge, attitudes, practices and barriers to pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reaction reporting: A cross-sectional multicentral study.

Khan Z, Karatas Y, Hamid S PLoS One. 2023; 18(5):e0285811.

PMID: 37224133 PMC: 10208525. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0285811.


References
1.
Li Q, Zhang S, Chen H, Fang S, Yu X, Liu D . Awareness and attitudes of healthcare professionals in Wuhan, China to the reporting of adverse drug reactions. Chin Med J (Engl). 2004; 117(6):856-61. View

2.
Classen D, Pestotnik S, Evans R, Lloyd J, Burke J . Adverse drug events in hospitalized patients. Excess length of stay, extra costs, and attributable mortality. JAMA. 1997; 277(4):301-6. View

3.
Feely J, Moriarty S, OConnor P . Stimulating reporting of adverse drug reactions by using a fee. BMJ. 1990; 300(6716):22-3. PMC: 1661889. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.300.6716.22. View

4.
Bateman D, Sanders G, Rawlins M . Attitudes to adverse drug reaction reporting in the Northern Region. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1992; 34(5):421-6. PMC: 1381471. View

5.
Lazarou J, Pomeranz B, Corey P . Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. JAMA. 1998; 279(15):1200-5. DOI: 10.1001/jama.279.15.1200. View