Adverse drug reaction reporting by community pharmacists- The barriers and facilitators

Purpose: The United Kingdom's “Yellow Card Scheme” for reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) has been operating for 50 years, but reporting rates by community pharmacists remain low. The aim of the study was therefore to investigate the views and experiences of ADR reporting by community pharmacists in Wales, with a particular focus on the potential barriers and facilitators to reporting. Methods: Following ethics approval and piloting, a self‐complete questionnaire was mailed to all registered community pharmacies in Wales, UK (n = 713). A follow‐up mailing was sent to nonresponders after 2 weeks. Results A response rate of 52% (n = 372) was achieved, of whom 57% had never submitted a yellow card. Key barriers to reporting were not seeing ADRs, difficulty identifying the causative drug, not being sure which ADRs to report, and lack of time. Key facilitators were being able to report through dispensary software and having clearer guidelines about what to report. Differences between those who had previously reported ADRs and those who had not suggested lack of confidence and uncertainty about what to report were more of a barrier for nonreporters. Conversely, reporters wanted feedback on reports, ability to keep reports on their dispensary records, and remuneration to aid them with reporting. Conclusions While the respondents generally expressed positive attitudes towards ADR reporting, a number of barriers and potential facilitators were nevertheless identified. Clearer support and guidance for reporting, such as through a “champions” scheme similar to that run in Welsh hospitals, may help current nonreporters to engage

Assessment of diarrhea treatment and counseling in community pharmacies in Baghdad, Iraq: A simulated patient study

Background: Because community pharmacists are the most accessible healthcare professionals, they are often involved in managing minor ailments within the community setting. Objective: This study evaluated the community pharmacists’ history taking practice, medicine dispensing and advice in response to acute diarrhea. Methods: Authors conducted a simulated-patient study in 75 community pharmacies in Baghdad, Iraq from February to May 2015. The female simulated-patient complained of acute diarrhea that had lasted for one day and requested for medicine to treat her condition. After exiting each pharmacy, she then assessed the practices of the community pharmacists through the use of a specially designed checklist adopted with modifications from relevant guidelines. For history taking, a maximum total of eight was the highest obtainable score. Data collected was quantitatively analyzed and Mann-Whitney, Chi-square or Fishers exact tests were used at an alpha level of 0.05. Results: All of the 75 pharmacies visited were managed by professionally qualified pharmacists. The most common questions asked during history taking were number of diarrheal episodes (n=62; 82.7%); duration of symptoms (n=59; 78.7%) and presence of other diseases and if any drug had been taken (n=58; 77.3%). Female pharmacists had a higher total mean score (6.45, SD=1.33) for history taking when compared to their male counterparts (4.34, SD=2.13); p <0.001. Medicine combination of diphenoxylate HCl 2.5mg + atropine sulphate 0.025mg (n=34; 27.9%) was most frequently dispensed while the least was oral rehydration salt (n=1; 0.8%). Around 20% (n=15) of pharmacists dispensed antimicrobial agents. Over half (n=46; 61.3%) of pharmacists indicated the frequency of use on the medicine packet. Conversely, less than half (n=33; 44.0%) gave any advice on food and fluid intake. Conclusions: Majority of the community pharmacists asked at least four questions while taking patient history and was very likely to recommend antidiarrheal medicines as first line treatment options. The authors recommend the development of a minimum standard of practice as well as enhanced training for Iraqi community pharmacists

Aid conditionalities, international Good Manufacturing Practice standards and local production rights: a case study of local production in Nepal

© 2015 Brhlikova et al. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http:// creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.This work was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council and the Department for International Development [RES-167-25-0110] through the collaborative research project Tracing Pharmaceuticals in South Asia (2006 – 2009). In addition to the authors of this paper, the project team included: Soumita Basu, Gitanjali Priti Bhatia, Erin Court, Abhijit Das, Stefan Ecks, Patricia Jeffery, Roger Jeffery, Rachel Manners, and Liz Richardson. Martin Chautari (Kathmandu) and the Centre for Health and Social Justice (New Delhi) provided resources drawn upon in writing this paper but are not responsible for the views expressed, nor are ESRC or DFID. Ethical review was provided by the School of Social and Political Science at the University of Edinburgh, and ethical approval in Nepal for the study granted by the Nepal Health Research Council (NHRC)

Personal Drug Selection: Problem-Based Learning in Pharmacology: Experience from a Medical School in Nepal

BACKGROUND: At the Manipal College of Medical Sciences, Pokhara, Nepal, Pharmacology is taught during the first four semesters of the undergraduate medical course. Personal or P-drug selection is an important exercise. The present study was carried out to obtain student opinion about the P-drug learning sessions, the assessment examinations, and on the small group dynamics. METHOD: The practical sessions on P-drug selection are carried out in small groups. Student feedback about the session was obtained using focus group discussions. The focus groups were selected to represent both genders and the three main nationalities, Nepalese, Indians, and Sri Lankans. There were four Nepalese, five Indians, and three Sri Lankans. Within each nationality and gender category the students were randomly selected. The respondents were explained the objectives of the study and were invited to participate. Written informed consent was obtained. The discussion lasted around two hours and was conducted in the afternoon in two groups of six students each. The first author (PRS) acted as a facilitator. The responses were recorded and analyzed qualitatively. RESULTS: The overall student opinion was positive. Around 25% (3 respondents) of respondents were confused about whether P-drugs were for a disease or a patient. Group consensus was commonly used to give numerical values for the different criteria. The large number of brands created problems in calculating cost. The students wanted more time for the exercise in the examination. Formative assessment during the learning sessions may be considered. The group members usually got along well. Absenteeism was a problem and not all members put in their full effort. The physical working environment should be improved. CONCLUSIONS: Based on what the students say, the sessions on P-drugs should be continued and strengthened. Modifications in the sessions are required. Sessions during the clinical years and internship training can be considered

Scholarly publishing depends on peer reviewers

The peer-review crisis is posing a risk to the scholarly peer-reviewed journal system. Journals have to ask many potential peer reviewers to obtain a minimum acceptable number of peers accepting reviewing a manuscript. Several solutions have been suggested to overcome this shortage. From reimbursing for the job, to eliminating pre- publication reviews, one cannot predict which is more dangerous for the future of scholarly publishing. And, why not acknowledging their contribution to the final version of the article published? PubMed created two categories of contributors: authors [AU] and collaborators [IR]. Why not a third category for the peer-reviewer

Scholarly publishing depends on peer reviewers

The peer-review crisis is posing a risk to the scholarly peer-reviewed journal system. Journals have to ask many potential peer reviewers to obtain a minimum acceptable number of peers accepting reviewing a manuscript. Several solutions have been suggested to overcome this shortage. From reimbursing for the job, to eliminating pre-publication reviews, one cannot predict which is more dangerous for the future of scholarly publishing. And, why not acknowledging their contribution to the final version of the article published? PubMed created two categories of contributors: authors [AU] and collaborators [IR]. Why not a third category for the peer-reviewer?Scopu

Medication storage and self-medication behaviour amongst female students in Malaysia

Objectives: The aims of this study are to determine the prevalence, attitudes and behaviours of medication storage and self-medication amongst female students at Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM). Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted and cluster random sampling technique was used for respondent selection. A pre-piloted questionnaire was administered to female respondents so as to collect the data. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 12 and analysis was conducted using descriptive analysis procedures.Results: Of the 481 participants (mean age; SD was 22.1; 3.3), 93.1% (n=448) students stated that they stored medicine in their rooms, while 70.7% (n=340) stated that they stopped taking a prescribed medicine without consulting a doctor. The prevalence of self-medication was 80.9% (n=389). The most common reasons for self-medication were related to their knowledge of their ailment and its treatment (58.0%), 14.4% thought it saved time and 8.5% mentioned that medication given by provider was not effective. The most common symptoms were otorhinolaryngology problems (22.5%), followed by respiratory disease (19.6%), Gastro Intestinal Tract (GIT) disease (18.1%) and headache/fever (16.8%). Commonly used medicines were analgesics & antipyretics (30.2%), ear, nose & throat drugs (10.8%), vitamins & minerals (10.8%), GIT drugs (8.5%), anti-infections (7.3%) and herbal medicines (3.5%). Prevalence of medicine storage and self-medication practice is high among educated female students in USM.Conclusions: There is a need to educate the students to ensure safe practice by increasing their awareness. Strict policies need to be implemented on the unrestricted availability of medicines so as to prevent the wastage of medicines

Health professionals' knowledge, attitude and practices towards pharmacovigilance in Nepal

Pharmacovigilance can be helpful in protecting consumers from harmful effects of medicines. Healthcare professionals should consider Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) reporting as their professional obligation and should be aware of the existing pharmacovigilance mechanisms in their countries. In Nepal, pharmacovigilance activities were initiated in 2004. Objectives: The present study evaluated the knowledge, attitude and practices (KAP) of the healthcare professionals towards ADRs and pharmacovigilance in Manipal Teaching Hospital (MTH), a tertiary care teaching hospital attached to the regional pharmacovigilance center in western Nepal. Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out in 2007 using a pretested (Cronbach alpha=0.72) questionnaire having 25 questions (15 questions on knowledge, 5 on attitude and 5 on practice). The correct/positive responses were given a score of ‘2’ and the wrong/negative responses ‘1’, maximum possible score of ‘50’. Results: A total of 131 responses were obtained among which 42 were incomplete and remaining 89 [females 49 (55.1%)] were analyzed. Of the 89 professionals, 29 (32.6%) were doctors, 46 (51.8) nurses and 14 (15.7%) pharmacists. The mean age was 28.32 (SD=8.46) years and the median (interquartile range) of duration of the service 14.5 (6-36) months. The total KAP scores was 40.06 (SD=3.51) for doctors, 38.92 (SD=4.83) for pharmacists, and 35.82 (SD=3.75) for nurses. Among the 89 professionals, 59 (62.3%) had not reported even a single ADR to the pharmacovigilance center. Conclusion: The healthcare professionals at the MTH had a poor KAP towards ADRs and pharmacovigilance and there is a need for educational and awareness intervention for these professionals