Addressing the under-reporting of adverse drug reactions in public health programs controlling HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria: A prospective cohort study

Background Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) are a major clinical and public health problem world-wide. The prompt reporting of suspected ADRs to regulatory authorities to activate drug safety surveillance and regulation appears to be the most pragmatic measure for addressing the problem. This paper evaluated a pharmacovigilance (PV) training model that was designed to improve the reporting of ADRs in public health programs treating the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), Tuberculosis (TB) and Malaria. Methods A Structured Pharmacovigilance and Training Initiative (SPHAR-TI) model based on the World Health Organization accredited Structured Operational Research and Training Initiative (SOR-IT) model was designed and implemented over a period of 12 months. A prospective cohort design was deployed to evaluate the outcomes of the model. The primary outcomes were knowledge gained and Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSR) (completed adverse drug reactions monitoring forms) submitted, while the secondary outcomes were facility based Pharmacovigilance Committees activated and health facility healthcare workers trained by the participants. Results Fifty-five (98%) participants were trained and followed up for 12 months. More than three quarter of the participants have never received training on pharmacovigilance prior to the course. Yet, a significant gain in knowledge was observed after the participants completed a comprehensive training for six days. In only seven months, 3000 ICSRs (with 100% completeness) were submitted, 2,937 facility based healthcare workers trained and 46 Pharmacovigilance Committees activated by the participants. Overall, a 273% increase in ICSRs submission to the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) was observed. Conclusion Participants gained knowledge, which tended to increase the reporting of ADRs. The SPHAR-TI model could be an option for strengthening the continuous reporting of ADRs in public health programs in resource limited settings

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries