| 2. |
- Wallerstedt, Susanna Maria, 1970, et al.
(författare)
-
Reporting of adverse drug reactions may be influenced by feedback to the reporting doctor
- 2007
-
Ingår i: Eur J Clin Pharmacol. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0031-6970. ; 63:5, s. 505-8
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate two different feedback alternatives to doctors reporting adverse drug reactions (ADRs) concerning (1) effects on reporting rates and (2) doctors' opinions. METHODS: When reporting an ADR during January through March 2006, doctors in the western part of Sweden were randomised according to working address to receive feedback I or feedback II. Feedback I consisted of the conventional mode of feedback. Feedback II consisted of the contents of feedback I supplemented with information on the reported drug from the regional drug information centre. A questionnaire was administered 2 weeks after the feedback. The doctors were asked to give their opinion on the feedback concerning amount of information, quality and overall impression on a 6-point scale, where 1 corresponded to too little/very bad and 6 to too much/very good. During the inclusion period and the 6-month follow-up period, additional ADR reports originating from receivers of either feedback I or II were identified and compared. RESULTS: Sixty-six doctors received feedback I, and 49 received feedback II. The number of doctors reporting more than once was greater in the group receiving feedback II (39% vs. 22%; P = 0.039). Feedback II was judged to contain more information than feedback I (4.1 +/- 0.8 vs. 3.6 +/- 0.9; P = 0.014). No difference between the feedback alternatives concerning doctors' opinions on quality and overall impression could be detected. Sixty-five doctors (70%) stated that the content of the feedback letter could affect their willingness to report ADRs. CONCLUSION: The content of the feedback to doctors reporting ADRs may influence reporting rates.
|
|
