Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29402876›Full record

ArticleMedical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre2018

Reporting of Adverse Drug Reactions in Primary Care Settings in Kuwait: A Comparative Study of Physicians and Pharmacists.

Jacinthe Lemay, Fatemah M Alsaleh, Lulwa Al-Buresli, Mohammed Al-Mutairi, Eman A Abahussain, Tania Bayoud

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Knowledge, attitude and practice of hospital pharmacists towards pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reaction reporting in Najran, Saudi Arabia.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jacinthe LemayDepartment of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Faculty of Pharmacy, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait.
Fatemah M AlsalehDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait.
Lulwa Al-BuresliDepartment of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Faculty of Pharmacy, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait.
Mohammed Al-MutairiDepartment of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Faculty of Pharmacy, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait.
Eman A AbahussainDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait.
Tania BayoudDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait.
Kuwait University · KW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate and compare knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding pharmacovigilance (PV) and the reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADR) among physicians and pharmacists in primary care settings. SUBJECTS AND

methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted, in which a validated self-administered questionnaire was distributed to 386 physicians and 197 pharmacists in 38 primary care clinics in Kuwait. Categorical variables were described using numbers and percentages. The Pearson χ2 test, Fisher exact test, and Mann-Whitney U test were used as appropriate. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

resultsOf the 583 questionnaires distributed, 485 were completed (by 318 physicians and 167 pharmacists), giving an overall response rate of 83.2%. A total of 52.8% (n = 256) and 70.5% (n = 341) of the study participants were knowledgeable about the definitions of PV and ADR, respectively, with pharmacists demonstrating significantly better knowledge of PV (n = 105/167 vs. 151/318, i.e., 62.9 vs. 47.5%; p < 0.001) and purpose (n = 123/167 vs. 177/318, i.e., 74.1 vs. 55.7%; p < 0.001). However, the majority (n = 434/485; 89.4%) were not aware of an ADR reporting system in Kuwait. Almost every participant (n = 474/485; 97.7%) thought it was necessary to report ADR. However, significantly fewer physicians than pharmacists (n = 248/318 vs. 147/167, i.e., 78.0 vs. 88.0%; p < 0.01) believed that ADR reporting was a professional obligation. Only 27.8% (n = 133/485) had reported ADR, with pharmacists having reported significantly fewer than physicians (n = 35/167 vs. 98/318, i.e., 21.7 vs. 30.8%; p = 0.036).

conclusionsThis study indicated that the attitude was positive but there was suboptimal knowledge and poor practice among primary care physicians and pharmacists with regard to ADR reporting. Targeted training about ADR reporting while ensuring a robust regulatory framework would encourage ADR reporting practices in the primary health care setting in Kuwait.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePharmacovigilanceAdultAdverse Drug Reaction Reporting SystemsAttitude of Health PersonnelCross-Sectional StudiesDocumentationFemaleHumansKuwaitMaleMiddle AgedPharmacistsPhysiciansPrimary Health CareYoung AdultAdverse drug reactionPharmacovigilancePrimary care

Identifiers

PMID29402876
PMCPMC5968250
OpenAlexW2791076140

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.