Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Texas pharmacists’ opinions on reporting serious adverse drug events to the Food and Drug Administration: a qualitative study

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Pharmacy World & Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective Pharmacists in the United States (U.S.) are encouraged to report serious adverse drug events (ADEs) to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) through MedWatch. The aim of this study is to investigate the beliefs and opinions of Texas pharmacists toward reporting ADEs to the FDA. Methods The comments made by pharmacists in state-wide mail survey about reporting serious ADEs to the FDA were independently content analyzed and categorized into themes by two raters. Some comments contained more than one idea and these were categorized into different themes. Main outcome Beliefs and opinions of Texas pharmacists toward ADE reporting. Results A total of 86 pharmacists provided comments on ADE reporting. Texas pharmacists had positive opinions about reporting ADEs to the FDA (e.g., important, valuable and positive). Respondents cited many constraints that impeded the reporting of ADEs: lack of time, failure to know which ADEs to report, difficulty in linking ADEs to a specific drug, lack of patient history, lack of compensation, fear of malpractice suits, limited support from employers and mistrust of the FDA. Pharmacists recommended continuing education and training to raise awareness on ADE reporting and streamlining the reporting process to enhance pharmacists’ reporting behavior. Conclusions Despite pharmacists having positive opinions about reporting ADEs to the FDA, actual reporting may be impeded by a myriad of challenges involved in reporting ADEs. ADE reporting can be improved through addressing these challenges. Continuing education and on-the-job training on ADE reporting are imperative.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy. ASHP guidelines on adverse drug reaction monitoring and reporting. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1995;52:417–9.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Brewer T, Colditz GA. Postmarketing surveillance and adverse drug reactions: current perspectives and future needs. J Am Med Assoc. 1999;281(9):824–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Leape LL. Reporting of adverse events. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(20):1633–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Barwick DM. Quality comes home. Ann Intern Med. 1996;125(10):839–43.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Solberg L, Moaser G, McDonald S. The three faces of performance measurement: improvement, accountability, and research. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 1997;23(3):135–47.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Classen DC, Pestotnik S, Evans SM, Lloyd JF, Burke JP. Adverse drug events in hospitalized patients. J Am Med Assoc. 1997;277(4):301–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Bates DW, Spell N, Cullen DJ, Burdick N, Laird NM, Petersen LA, et al. The costs of adverse drug events in hospitalized patients. Adverse events prevention study group. J Am Med Assoc. 1997;277(4):307–11.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Cohen MR. Why error reporting systems should be voluntary. Br Med J. 2000;320(7237):728–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Goldman SA. Limitations and strengths of spontaneous reports data. Clin Ther. 1998;20(Supplement 3):C40–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. US Food and Drug Administration. What is a serious adverse event? www.fda.gov/medwatch/report/DESK/advevnt.htm.

  11. US Department of Health and Human Services. MedWatch—The FDA safety information and adverse event reporting program (Form 3500). 2009. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Safety/MedWatch/HowToReport/DownloadForms/UCM082725.pdf.

  12. Ahmad SR. Adverse drug event monitoring at the Food and Drug Administration: your report can make a difference. J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18(1):57–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cobert BL. Manual of drug safety and pharmacovigilance. Boston: Jones and Bartlett Publishers; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Office of Drug Safety. Office of Drug Safety annual report. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration. http://www.fda.gov/cder/Offices/ODS/annrep2001/annualreport2001.htm (2001). Accessed 18 May 2008.

  15. Lawton R, Parker D. Barriers to incident reporting in a healthcare system. Qual Saf Health Care. 2002;11(1):15–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Cullen DJ, Bates DW, Small SD, Cooper JB, Nemeskal AR, Leape LL. The incident reporting system does not detect adverse drug events: a problem for quality improvement. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 1995;21(10):541–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Barach P, Smith BJ. Reporting and preventing medical mishaps: lessons from non-medical near miss reporting system. Br Med J. 2000;320(7237):759–63.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Green CF, Mottram DR, Rowe PH, Pirmohamed M. Attitudes and knowledge of hospital pharmacists to adverse drug reaction reporting. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2001;51(1):81–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Herdeiro MT, Figueiras A, Polonia J, Gestal-Otero JJ. Influence of pharmacists’ attitudes on adverse drug reaction reporting: a case-control study in Portugal. Drug Saf. 2006;29(4):331–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Houghton J, Woods F, Davis S, Coulson RA, Routledge PA. Community pharmacist reporting of suspected ADRs: attitudes of community pharmacists and general practitioners in Wales. Pharm J. 1999;263(7071):788–91.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Sweis D, Wong IC. A survey on factors that could affect adverse drug reaction reporting according to hospital pharmacists in Great Britain. Drug Saf. 2000;23(2):165–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. van Grootheest AC, Mes K, den Berg LTW. Attitudes of community pharmacists in the Netherlands towards adverse drug reaction reporting. Int J Pharm Pract. 2002;10(4):267–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Generali JA, Danish MA, Rosenbaum SE. Knowledge of and attitudes about adverse drug reaction reporting among Rhode Island pharmacists. Ann Pharmacother. 1995;29(4):365–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. McArdle D, Burns N, Ireland A. Attitudes and beliefs of doctors towards medication error reporting. Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2003;16(7):326–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Uribe CL, Schweikgart SB, Pathak DS, Marsch GB, Fraley RR. Perceived barriers to medical-error reporting: an exploratory investigation. J Healthc Manag. 2002;47(4):263–74.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Inman WHW, editor. Assessment of drug safety problems. 3rd ed. Hamilton: McMaster University Library Press; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Wakefield DS, Wakefield BJ, Uden-Holeman T, Borders T, Blegen M, Vaughn T. Understanding why medication errors may not be reported. Am J Med Qual. 1999;14(2):81–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kessler DA, Kennedy DL. MedWatch: FDA’s new medical products reporting program. J Clin Eng. 1993;18(6):489–92.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Biriell C, Edwards RI. Reasons for reporting adverse drug reactions—some thoughts based on an International review. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 1997;6(1):21–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Irujo M, Beitia G, Bes-Rastrollo M, Figueiras A, Hernandez-Diaz S, Lasheras B. Factors that influence under-reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions among community pharmacists in a Spanish region. Drug Saf. 2007;30(11):1073–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Hazell L, Shakir SAW. Under-reporting of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review. Drug Saf. 2006;29(5):385–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Eland IA, Belton KJ, van Grootheest AC, Meiners AP, Rawlins MD, Stricker BH. Attitudinal survey of voluntary reporting of adverse drug reactions. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1999;48(4):623–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bäckström M, Mjörndal T, Dahlqvist R, Nordkvist-Olsson T. Attitudes to reporting adverse drug reactions in northern Sweden. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2000;56(9):729–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Scott HD, Thacher-Renshaw A, Rosenbaum SE, Waters WJ Jr, Green M, Andrews LG, et al. Physician reporting of adverse drug reactions. Results of the Rhode Island Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Project. J Am Med Assoc. 1990;263(13):1785–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge Abiola Oladapo, Michelle Rascati, Ayoade Adeyemi, Haesuk Park and Busuyi Olotu for helping in stuffing the survey materials prior to posting.

Funding

This study was funded by a fellowship from the United States Pharmacopeia.

Conflicts of interest

No conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Pharmacy, The University of Texas at Austin, Room PHR 3.209, 1 University Station, Austin, TX, 78712-1074, USA

    Paul Gavaza, Carolyn M. Brown & Star Khoza

Authors
  1. Paul Gavaza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carolyn M. Brown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Star Khoza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul Gavaza.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gavaza, P., Brown, C.M. & Khoza, S. Texas pharmacists’ opinions on reporting serious adverse drug events to the Food and Drug Administration: a qualitative study. Pharm World Sci 32, 651–657 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-010-9420-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-010-9420-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation