IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0235591.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Increasing adverse drug reaction reporting—How can we do better?

Author

Listed:
  • Miri Potlog Shchory
  • Lee H Goldstein
  • Lidia Arcavi
  • Renata Shihmanter
  • Matitiahu Berkovitch
  • Amalia Levy

Abstract

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are associated with morbidity and mortality worldwide. Although national systems for reporting ADRs exist there is a low reporting rate. The aim of the current study was to evaluate an intervention plan for improving ADRs reporting among medical professionals (physicians and nurses). A multicentre intervention study was conducted, in which one medical centre was randomly assigned to the intervention group and two medical centres to the control group. The study consisted of 3 phases: baseline data collection, intervention and follow-up of the reporting rate. The questionnaire that was filled in at base line and at the end of study, contained questions about personal/professional demographic variables, and statements regarding knowledge of and behaviour toward ADRs reporting. The intervention program consisted of posters, lectures, distant electronic learning and reminders. An increase in the number of ADRs reports was noted in the intervention group (74 times higher than in the control group) during the intervention period, which was gradually decreased with as the study progressed (adjusted O.R = 74.1, 95% CI = 21.11–260.1, p

Suggested Citation

  • Miri Potlog Shchory & Lee H Goldstein & Lidia Arcavi & Renata Shihmanter & Matitiahu Berkovitch & Amalia Levy, 2020. "Increasing adverse drug reaction reporting—How can we do better?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-15, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0235591
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235591
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0235591
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0235591&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0235591?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0235591. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.