METHOD: A cross-sectional study was planned to approach potential respondents for the study. A self-administered questionnaire was delivered to community pharmacists/pharmacy technicians (N=292) practising in Dhaka, Bangladesh.
RESULTS: The overall response to the survey was 69.5% (n=203). The majority of the sample was comprised of pharmacy technicians (152, 74.9%) who possessed a diploma in pharmacy, followed by pharmacists (37, 18.2%) and others (12, 5.9%). Overall, 72 (35.5%) of the respondents disclosed that they had experienced an ADR at their pharmacy, yet more than half (105, 51.7%) were not familiar with the existence of an ADR reporting body in Bangladesh. Exploring the barriers to the reporting of ADRs, it was revealed that the top four barriers to ADR reporting were 'I do not know how to report (Relative Importance Index (RII)=0.998)', 'reporting forms are not available (0.996)', 'I am not motivated to report (0.997)' and 'Unavailability of professional environment to discuss about ADR (RII=0.939)'. In addition to these, a majority (141, 69.46%) were not confident about the classification of ADRs (RII=0.889) and were afraid of legal liabilities associated with reporting ADRs (RII=0.806). Moreover, a lack of knowledge about pharmacotherapy and the detection of ADRs was another major factor hindering their reporting (RII=0.731).
CONCLUSIONS: The Directorate of Drug Administration in Bangladesh needs to consider the results of this study to help it improve and simplify ADR reporting in Bangladeshi community pharmacy settings.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Amman, the capital and largest city of Jordan, using a validated questionnaire. It was distributed to pharmacists working in community and hospital pharmacies using a convenience sampling technique. Descriptive and inferential statistics were performed in this study.
RESULTS: A total of 340 questionnaires distributed, 300 (88%) pharmacists responded. Over 50% of pharmacists claimed that they have sufficient knowledge regarding FDI. Virtually, the overall median (interquartile range) knowledge score was 18 (15-21), approximately 60%. The highest knowledge scores were for alcohol-drug interactions section (66.6%) followed by both common food-drug interactions and the timing of drug intake to food consumption sections with a score of (58.3%) for each, reflecting a suboptimal knowledge of FDIs among the pharmacists.
CONCLUSION: Pharmacists had unsatisfactory knowledge about common FDIs, with no significant difference between hospital and community pharmacists. Therefore, more attention and efforts should be played to improve awareness about potential food-drug interactions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Public Health Clinic Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (PHC-PSQ) towards pharmacy services was developed using exploratory factor analysis and Cronbach's α. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 400 patients visiting the pharmacy in three randomly selected public health clinics recruited via systematic random sampling. Data was collected using a set of questionnaire including PHC-PSQ. Factors associated with patient satisfaction was analysed using multiple linear regression.
RESULTS: Final PHC-PSQ consisted of three domains (administrative competency, technical competency and convenience of location) and 22 items with 69.9% total variance explained. Cronbach's α for total items was 0.96. Total mean score for patient satisfaction was 7.56 (SD 1.32). Older age and higher education were associated with lower patient satisfaction mean score. Patients who had visited the pharmacy more than once in the past three months, perceived to be in better health status and had a more correct general knowledge of pharmacists expressed higher patient satisfaction mean score.
CONCLUSIONS: PHC-PSQ is a newly developedtool to measure patient satisfaction towards pharmacy services in public health clinics in Malaysia. Patient satisfaction was relatively high. Age, education, frequency of visit, self-perceived health status and general knowledge of pharmacists were factors significantly associated with patient satisfaction.
Methods: A cross-sectional study, using a validated 23-item self-administered questionnaire, was conducted among pharmacists from 11 public hospitals in the State of Selangor, Malaysia, from December 2016 to January 2017. All public hospital pharmacists (n=432) were invited to participate in the survey. A 5-point Likert scale was employed in the questionnaire; the perception section was scored from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) while the practice section was scored from 1 (never) to 5 (always). Both descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were used to analyse data.
Results: Of the 432 pharmacists surveyed, 199 responded, giving a response rate of 46.0%. The majority of the respondents agreed (n=190, 95.5%) that the AMS programme improves patient care at their hospitals (median=5; IQR=1). Slightly less than half of the respondents indicated that a local antibiotic guideline was established in their hospitals (median=3, IQR=2.5), and had taken part in antimicrobial awareness campaigns to promote optimal use of antimicrobials in hospitals (median=3, IQR=1).
Conclusions: Overall, the perception and practices of the surveyed hospital pharmacists towards AMS programme were positive. National antibiotic guidelines, which take into consideration local antimicrobial resistance patterns, should be used fully to improve antimicrobial usage and to reduce practice variation. Collaboration among healthcare professionals should be strengthened to minimise the unfavourable consequences of unintended use of antimicrobial agents while optimising clinical outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: This study examined community pharmacists' beliefs towards risk minimization measures in off-label drug use in Malaysia and assessed the relationship between perceived risk of off-label drug use and beliefs towards risk minimization measures.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 154 pharmacists practicing in randomly selected community pharmacies in Kuala Lumpur and the State of Selangor, Malaysia.
RESULTS: The majority agreed or strongly agreed that adverse drug events from the off-label drug should be reported to the regulatory authority (90.9%) and the off-label drug should only be used when the benefit outweighs potential risks (88.3%). Less than half (48.1%) agreed or strongly agreed that written informed consent should be obtained before dispensing off-label drugs and a majority (63.7%) agreed or strongly agreed that the informed consent process will be burdensome to healthcare professionals. Beliefs towards risk minimization measures were significantly associated with perceived risk of off-label drug use regarding efficacy (p = 0. 033), safety (p = 0.001), adverse drug rection (p = 0.001) and medication errors (p = 0.002).
CONCLUSION: The community pharmacists have positive beliefs towards most of the risk minimization measures. However, beliefs towards written informed consent requirements are not encouraging. Enhancing risk perception may help influence positive beliefs towards risk minimization measures.