METHODS: Retrospective review of all neonates with clinical and radiological evidence of non-perforated NEC that were treated in a tertiary-level referral hospital between 2009 and 2018. General patient demographics, laboratory parameters and outcomes were recorded. Receiver operating characteristics analysis was performed to evaluated optimal cut-offs and area under the curve (AUC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Methods: The study was conducted for the duration of 5 months - November 2018 to March 2019 - in different clinics and tertiary care hospitals of Karachi, Pakistan. Respondents were interviewed by our researchers using 30 items questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the answers of respondents to survey items. Pearson correlation and independent sample t-test were employed to recognize the association between the responses of participants and independent variables. P values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results: A total of 421 questionnaires were completed by physicians and clinical pharmacists. The mean age of the study participants was 49.5 years. Around 98% of pharmacists and 93.5% of physicians were well conversant with the definition of unlicensed and off-label drugs. Around 68% of physicians and 77% of pharmacists reported that they were more concerned about the efficacy of such drugs as compared to that of licensed medicines in children. The most frequent off-label categories observed in the study were dose (65.21%) and indication (17.52%). A vast majority (>80%) thought that approving new drugs by regulatory authorities will drop the occurrence of medication errors due to incorrect dosing. The British National Formulary (BNF) for children was used as the best reliable source of information among respondents.

METHODS: A retrospective review of reports received from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2012 was undertaken. Descriptive statistics method was applied.

RESULTS: A total of 17,357 MEs reported were reviewed. The majority of errors were from public-funded hospitals. Near misses were classified in 86.3 % of the errors. The majority of errors (98.1 %) had no harmful effects on the patients. Prescribing contributed to more than three-quarters of the overall errors (76.1 %). Pharmacists detected and reported the majority of errors (92.1 %). Cases of erroneous dosage or strength of medicine (30.75 %) were the leading type of error, whilst cardiovascular (25.4 %) was the most common category of drug found.

METHODS: A systematic and comprehensive articles search strategy was carried out in different seven electronic databases (PubMed, PubMed Central, Goggle Scholar, Ovid-SP, MEDLINE, Wiley Online Library, DergiPark) from 2010 to 2020. We searched to identify existing literature about cross-sectional observational studies investigating the KAP of HCPs regarding PV and ADRs reporting in different geographical regions of Turkey. Quality assessment and risk of bias were assessed among included studies.

RESULTS: Fifteen studies were chosen for full-text analysis. Finally, according to inclusion criteria, seven research articles were selected for systematic review. Overall, the KAP of HCPs varies across the studies. The lack of a standardized validated measuring tool to evaluate the KAP and differences in questionnaire items were the main limitations in included studies. Around, 69.1% (range: 54.6-100%) of HCPs were not aware of the national pharmacovigilance center in Turkey. About, 37.5% (range: 7.1-75.7%) of HCPs believed that reporting of ADRs is not important and 87.5% (range: 69.3-100%) stated that they never reported ADR previously during their practice. The most frequently highlighted barriers to PV were lack of time, uncertainty and did not know where to report.

METHODS: The current research was a cross-sectional study design in which a pre-validated questionnaire was administered to physicians and pharmacists in Abbottabad, Pakistan. The study was conducted for two months from January 2016 to February 2016.

RESULTS: A total of 194 physicians and pharmacists responded with a response rate of 35.3%. All the respondents either strongly agreed or agreed that ADRs reporting is a part of their duty. Half of the respondents agreed that monitoring of drug safety is important. Around three quarters of respondents (74.2%) stated that they did not report ADRs due to unavailability of reporting forms while 70% cited lack of a proper pharmacovigilance center as one of the key barriers. Half of the respondents (52.2%) did not report due to their insufficient knowledge. A large majority (81.8%) said that they would report ADRs if there is pharmacovigilance center. On the point of incentives, opinion seems to be divided. Slightly less than half (47.8%) cited their wish to have few incentives while the remaining 52.2% either preferred to be neutral or disagreed.