Strengthening pharmacovigilance through patient reporting: a scoping review of awareness, barriers, and facilitators.

IF 2.5 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice Pub Date : 2026-04-13 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.1080/20523211.2026.2651405
Adeel Aslam, Hafizah Abdul Majid, Nimra Muhammad Boota, Asma Ghulam Mustafa, Sumera Saeed Akhtar
{"title":"Strengthening pharmacovigilance through patient reporting: a scoping review of awareness, barriers, and facilitators.","authors":"Adeel Aslam, Hafizah Abdul Majid, Nimra Muhammad Boota, Asma Ghulam Mustafa, Sumera Saeed Akhtar","doi":"10.1080/20523211.2026.2651405","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) significantly impact global healthcare systems, yet patient participation in pharmacovigilance remains underutilised. This scoping review synthesises evidence on patient awareness, barriers, and facilitators for ADR reporting to inform strategies for enhancing pharmacovigilance systems.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following the Arksey and O'Malley framework, we conducted a scoping review of studies published up to 2025 across PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, extracted data, and synthesised findings using thematic and descriptive analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1,420 articles were identified, of which 42 studies from 25 countries met the inclusion criteria. Most employed quantitative descriptive designs (n = 27), followed by mixed-methods (n = 7) and qualitative approaches (n = 5). Sample sizes ranged from 15 participants to over 500,000 ADR reports from national databases. Data collection methods included questionnaires, interviews, and electronic surveys, while six studies analysed secondary data from pharmacovigilance systems such as VigiBase and the Yellow Card Scheme. Key barriers included limited knowledge, complex reporting processes, and a lack of feedback, whereas facilitators included healthcare professional support and simplified, user-friendly platforms.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patient reporting is hindered by systemic and educational gaps, especially in LMICs. Strategic interventions, such as simplified reporting mechanisms, nationwide awareness campaigns, digital tool integration, and healthcare provider training, are critical to empower patients as active pharmacovigilance contributors. Future efforts must prioritise culturally tailored approaches and equitable access to reporting infrastructure.</p>","PeriodicalId":16740,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice","volume":"19 1","pages":"2651405"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13072706/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20523211.2026.2651405","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) significantly impact global healthcare systems, yet patient participation in pharmacovigilance remains underutilised. This scoping review synthesises evidence on patient awareness, barriers, and facilitators for ADR reporting to inform strategies for enhancing pharmacovigilance systems.

Methods: Following the Arksey and O'Malley framework, we conducted a scoping review of studies published up to 2025 across PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, extracted data, and synthesised findings using thematic and descriptive analyses.

Results: A total of 1,420 articles were identified, of which 42 studies from 25 countries met the inclusion criteria. Most employed quantitative descriptive designs (n = 27), followed by mixed-methods (n = 7) and qualitative approaches (n = 5). Sample sizes ranged from 15 participants to over 500,000 ADR reports from national databases. Data collection methods included questionnaires, interviews, and electronic surveys, while six studies analysed secondary data from pharmacovigilance systems such as VigiBase and the Yellow Card Scheme. Key barriers included limited knowledge, complex reporting processes, and a lack of feedback, whereas facilitators included healthcare professional support and simplified, user-friendly platforms.

Conclusions: Patient reporting is hindered by systemic and educational gaps, especially in LMICs. Strategic interventions, such as simplified reporting mechanisms, nationwide awareness campaigns, digital tool integration, and healthcare provider training, are critical to empower patients as active pharmacovigilance contributors. Future efforts must prioritise culturally tailored approaches and equitable access to reporting infrastructure.

通过患者报告加强药物警戒:对意识、障碍和促进因素的范围审查。
背景:药物不良反应(adr)严重影响全球卫生保健系统,但患者参与药物警戒仍然未得到充分利用。这一范围审查综合了关于患者意识、障碍和不良反应报告促进因素的证据,为加强药物警戒系统的战略提供信息。方法:遵循Arksey和O'Malley框架,我们对截至2025年在PubMed、Scopus、Embase、Web of Science、Cochrane Library和谷歌Scholar上发表的研究进行了范围综述。两名独立审稿人筛选标题、摘要和全文,提取数据,并使用专题和描述性分析综合研究结果。结果:共纳入1420篇文献,其中来自25个国家的42篇研究符合纳入标准。大多数采用定量描述性设计(n = 27),其次是混合方法(n = 7)和定性方法(n = 5)。样本量从15名参与者到来自国家数据库的50多万份ADR报告不等。数据收集方法包括问卷调查、访谈和电子调查,同时有6项研究分析了来自VigiBase和黄卡计划等药物警戒系统的二手数据。主要障碍包括有限的知识、复杂的报告流程和缺乏反馈,而促进因素包括医疗保健专业支持和简化的用户友好型平台。结论:患者报告受到系统和教育差距的阻碍,特别是在中低收入国家。战略干预措施,如简化报告机制、全国性宣传运动、数字工具集成和医疗保健提供者培训,对于增强患者作为积极药物警戒贡献者的能力至关重要。未来的努力必须优先考虑适合文化的方法和公平获取报告基础设施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice Health Professions-Pharmacy
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
9.50%
发文量
81
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书