Mohammed Gebre Dedefo, Renly Lim, Gizat M Kassie, Elizabeth Roughead, Lisa Kalisch Ellett
{"title":"澳大利亚消费者对药品不良反应报告的了解和经验:一项全国性调查。","authors":"Mohammed Gebre Dedefo, Renly Lim, Gizat M Kassie, Elizabeth Roughead, Lisa Kalisch Ellett","doi":"10.1007/s00228-024-03729-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to investigate the current knowledge and experiences of consumers in Australia on adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting and their reasons for reporting or not reporting ADRs, with a focus on the use of digital tools for ADR reporting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among adults who had taken medicine in Australia. A structured questionnaire with multiple choice or Likert scale responses with an option for participants to provide free-text responses and pretested for face validity was used. Consumer characteristics, knowledge, and ADR reporting practices were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 544 survey responses were included in the analysis. The majority of respondents were women (68%), and 22% were aged between 65 and 74 years. Fifty-eight percent (n = 317) of respondents knew that they could report ADRs to either the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), state or territory government health department, or healthcare professionals. Three-quarters (n = 405) of respondents stated that they had experienced an ADR; of these, 36% reported an ADR to either the TGA, state or territory government health department, or healthcare professionals. Among those who reported ADRs, 58% were unaware that they could use digital tools to report ADRs. The main reason for not reporting was that they did not think the ADR was serious enough to report (39%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Over half of consumers knew that they could report ADR; however, improved consumer awareness about using digital tools for ADR reporting and increased ADR reporting is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":11857,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":"1543-1554"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11393011/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Consumers' knowledge and experiences of adverse drug reaction reporting in Australia: a national survey.\",\"authors\":\"Mohammed Gebre Dedefo, Renly Lim, Gizat M Kassie, Elizabeth Roughead, Lisa Kalisch Ellett\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00228-024-03729-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study aimed to investigate the current knowledge and experiences of consumers in Australia on adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting and their reasons for reporting or not reporting ADRs, with a focus on the use of digital tools for ADR reporting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among adults who had taken medicine in Australia. A structured questionnaire with multiple choice or Likert scale responses with an option for participants to provide free-text responses and pretested for face validity was used. Consumer characteristics, knowledge, and ADR reporting practices were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 544 survey responses were included in the analysis. The majority of respondents were women (68%), and 22% were aged between 65 and 74 years. Fifty-eight percent (n = 317) of respondents knew that they could report ADRs to either the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), state or territory government health department, or healthcare professionals. Three-quarters (n = 405) of respondents stated that they had experienced an ADR; of these, 36% reported an ADR to either the TGA, state or territory government health department, or healthcare professionals. Among those who reported ADRs, 58% were unaware that they could use digital tools to report ADRs. The main reason for not reporting was that they did not think the ADR was serious enough to report (39%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Over half of consumers knew that they could report ADR; however, improved consumer awareness about using digital tools for ADR reporting and increased ADR reporting is needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11857,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1543-1554\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11393011/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-024-03729-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-024-03729-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Consumers' knowledge and experiences of adverse drug reaction reporting in Australia: a national survey.
This study aimed to investigate the current knowledge and experiences of consumers in Australia on adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting and their reasons for reporting or not reporting ADRs, with a focus on the use of digital tools for ADR reporting.
Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among adults who had taken medicine in Australia. A structured questionnaire with multiple choice or Likert scale responses with an option for participants to provide free-text responses and pretested for face validity was used. Consumer characteristics, knowledge, and ADR reporting practices were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test.
Results: A total of 544 survey responses were included in the analysis. The majority of respondents were women (68%), and 22% were aged between 65 and 74 years. Fifty-eight percent (n = 317) of respondents knew that they could report ADRs to either the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), state or territory government health department, or healthcare professionals. Three-quarters (n = 405) of respondents stated that they had experienced an ADR; of these, 36% reported an ADR to either the TGA, state or territory government health department, or healthcare professionals. Among those who reported ADRs, 58% were unaware that they could use digital tools to report ADRs. The main reason for not reporting was that they did not think the ADR was serious enough to report (39%).
Conclusion: Over half of consumers knew that they could report ADR; however, improved consumer awareness about using digital tools for ADR reporting and increased ADR reporting is needed.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology publishes original papers on all aspects of clinical pharmacology and drug therapy in humans. Manuscripts are welcomed on the following topics: therapeutic trials, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, pharmacogenetics, drug metabolism, adverse drug reactions, drug interactions, all aspects of drug development, development relating to teaching in clinical pharmacology, pharmacoepidemiology, and matters relating to the rational prescribing and safe use of drugs. Methodological contributions relevant to these topics are also welcomed.
Data from animal experiments are accepted only in the context of original data in man reported in the same paper. EJCP will only consider manuscripts describing the frequency of allelic variants in different populations if this information is linked to functional data or new interesting variants. Highly relevant differences in frequency with a major impact in drug therapy for the respective population may be submitted as a letter to the editor.
Straightforward phase I pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic studies as parts of new drug development will only be considered for publication if the paper involves
-a compound that is interesting and new in some basic or fundamental way, or
-methods that are original in some basic sense, or
-a highly unexpected outcome, or
-conclusions that are scientifically novel in some basic or fundamental sense.