ArticleTurkish journal of pharmaceutical sciences2025
Integrating a Pharmacovigilance and Response Unit Team for a Better Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting and Management: Insights from a Prospective Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Turkish journal of pharmaceutical sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The multidisciplinary team approach improves adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting and management. Our study aims to integrate a pharmacovigilance (PV) and Response Team within the general medicine department to improve ADR reporting and management. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective cross-sectional study for seven months in four general medicine wards. We proposed a PV and response unit team (PRUT), comprising a nursing student, and a Doctor of Pharmacy (intern). After the team received interventional educational training, we integrated them with the physician and head nurse of each general medicine inpatient ward. We then evaluated the effectiveness of the team in ADR reporting and management using a feedback survey. Results: In this study, comorbidities (30.69%) and polypharmacy (≥5 drugs) (26.25%) were major predisposing factors. Among drug-related problems in 125 patients, inappropriate drug use (28.80%) and unclear dose timing (21.60%) were predominant. Gastrointestinal disorders were common (44.73%), with dose adjustment being the top management strategy (36.84%). Over 71% supported the PRUT for improving patient safety and reducing medication errors, noting high effectiveness in consultation (85.92%) and in reducing the ADR reporting burden (87.32%). There is a statistically significant association between the level of agreement on the effectiveness of PRUT among healthcare professionals (p<0.01). Most healthcare professionals agreed on PRUT's effectiveness without any reports of low agreement levels. Conclusion: The PRUT effectively reported and managed ADRs. A multidisciplinary approach improves ADR reporting and management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.