Methods: This is a before-and-after study that took place in a tertiary Malaysian hospital. Discharge medications of patients ≥65 years old were reviewed to identify PIMs/PPOs using version 2 of the STOPP/START criteria. The prevalence and pattern of PIM/PPO before and after the intervention were compared. The intervention targeted the physicians and clinical pharmacists and it consisted of academic detailing and a newly developed smartphone application (app).
Results: The study involved 240 patients before (control group) and 240 patients after the intervention. The prevalence of PIM was 22% and 27% before and after the intervention, respectively (P = 0.213). The prevalence of PPO in the intervention group was significantly lower than that in the control group (42% Vs. 53.3%); P = 0.014. This difference remained statistically significant after controlling for other variables (P = 0.015). The intervention was effective in reducing the two most common PPOs; the omission of vitamin D supplements in patients with a history of falls (P = 0.001) and the omission of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor in patients with coronary artery disease (P = 0.03).
Conclusions: The smartphone app coupled with academic detailing was effective in reducing the prevalence of PPO at discharge. However, it did not significantly affect the prevalence or pattern of PIM.
Methods: We conducted a three-day course in February 2011 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. It was developed to provide attendees with the essential knowledge and skills to become a medication safety officer. Teaching methodologies included didactic teaching, group discussions, case presentations, and an independent study of medication safety materials. The content of the course focused on the various roles of a medication safety officer, the importance of medication safety in a health care setting, the incidence of adverse drug events in a hospital setting, strategies to identify and prevent adverse events, the use of root cause analysis and failure mode and effect analysis, the role of an officer in hospital accreditation, and ways for promoting safety culture. Assessment of the course outcome was accomplished by comparing scores of knowledge level before and after the course. The knowledge level was assessed by a 20-item exam which was developed and validated by course instructors.
Results: Twenty-one participants attended the course and completed both the baseline and after-course assessment questionnaires. The majority was male (N = 14, % = 66.7) with a job experience of 1-5 five years (N = 10, % = 47.6). The knowledge score increased from 14.3 ± 1.90 (mean ± standard deviation) at baseline to 18.5 ± 1.43 after successfully completing the course (P
METHODS: Literature search using electronic databases including PubMed, Google Scholar and National Medical Research Register was conducted. Additional articles were identified by reviewing the bibliography of the retrieved articles. The articles were searched with any of the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms in the title: adverse drug reaction, attitude, awareness, behaviour, experience, knowledge, Malaysia, perspectives, pharmacovigilance, practice and view. Studies were selected based on fulfilment of inclusion and exclusion criteria. The articles were scrutinised using thematic analysis.
KEY FINDINGS: Nine studies conducted among doctors, pharmacists and nurses met the inclusion criteria. Five themes emerged which included knowledge, attitude, practice, barriers and facilitators of adverse drug reaction reporting among healthcare professionals.
CONCLUSION: In general, healthcare professionals in Malaysia have good knowledge on and positive attitudes towards adverse drug reaction reporting. However, the practice of adverse drug reaction reporting was found to be unsatisfactory among healthcare professional in Malaysia. The approaches taken to enhance ADR reporting among Malaysian healthcare professionals should focus on alleviating lethargy and ignorance associated with ADR reporting.