Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28653291›Full record

ArticleDrug safety2017

Patients' Perspectives on Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting in a Developing Country: A Case Study from Ghana.

George Tsey Sabblah, Delese Mimi Darko, Hudu Mogtari, Linda Härmark, Eugène van Puijenbroek

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Drug safety, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Perceptions of managerial staff on the patient safety culture at a tertiary hospital in South Africa.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2022
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Adverse Drug Reactions in Norway: A Systematic Review.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

George Tsey SabblahFood and Drugs Authority, P. O. Box CT2783, Accra, Ghana. georgesabblah@gmail.com.
Delese Mimi DarkoFood and Drugs Authority, P. O. Box CT2783, Accra, Ghana.
Hudu MogtariFood and Drugs Authority, P. O. Box CT2783, Accra, Ghana.
Linda HärmarkNetherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb, WHO Collaborating Centre for Pharmacovigilance in Education and Patient Reporting, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands.
Eugène van PuijenbroekNetherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb, WHO Collaborating Centre for Pharmacovigilance in Education and Patient Reporting, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands.
Ministry of Food and Agriculture · GHNetherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRecent efforts to introduce direct patient reporting into pharmacovigilance systems have proved that patient reports contribute significantly to medicine safety, but there is a paucity of information relating to patients' perspectives regarding adverse drug reaction reporting in developing countries.

objectiveThe objective of this study was to explore patients' knowledge, attitudes, behaviours and opinions on spontaneous adverse drug reaction reporting in Ghana.

methodsA cross-sectional study using questionnaires administered through face-to-face interviews was carried out from 25 August, 2016 to 20 September, 2016 with 442 patients aged 18 years and above selected by convenience sampling from two community pharmacies in urban and rural Ghana. Reasons and opinions on patients' reporting on adverse drug reactions were surveyed using a 5-point Likert scale. The Pearson chi-square test was used to determine associations between background variables and responses on knowledge of adverse drug reaction reporting.

resultsResponses from 434 patients (86.7%) were included in the analysis. Among those interviewed, there was a high level of awareness regarding the existence of the National Pharmacovigilance Centre (81.6%). Approximately half of the respondents (49.5%) were aware that patients were able to report adverse drug reactions associated with medicinal products directly to the National Pharmacovigilance Centre. Of the respondents, 46.3% stated that they had an adverse drug reaction to their medicines in the past; of these, 53.2% reported to healthcare professionals and 36.9% failed to report because they stopped their medication. The three main reasons for patients' reporting were desire for extra information (92.4%), desire to share experiences with other people (91.7%) and expectation for the National Pharmacovigilance Centre to inform others about the possible adverse drug reactions (88.0%). Patients' opinions were to contribute to research/knowledge (96.5%) and improvements in drug safety (96.5%). Patients' behaviour towards adverse drug reaction reporting was affected by the likely consequences of reporting, influence of others and the ease of reporting.

conclusionPatients have a positive attitude and good knowledge on adverse drug reaction reporting to the National Pharmacovigilance Centre and report because they expect extra information and to contribute to drug safety. Patients' positive attitude towards adverse drug reaction reporting could be sustained by hosting periodic public awareness campaigns addressing the importance of adverse drug reaction reporting and by providing timely feedback to patients on regulatory decisions taken as a result of the reports that they submitted.

Indexed as

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesDeveloping CountriesFemaleGhanaHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedPharmacovigilanceSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID28653291
OpenAlexW2719477869

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.