Search

Objectives: The aim of this study was to develop a novel, self-administered questionnaire to identify primary-care physicians' knowledge and attitudes regarding antibiotics and resistance (KAAR)., Methods: The study population comprised primary care physicians. The study was conducted in five phases. Phase I consisted of a systematic review and qualitative focus-group study (n = 33 physicians), in which items were formulated so as to be measured on a continuous, visual analogue scale (VAS); in Phase II, content validation and face validity were evaluated by a panel of experts, which reformulated, added and deleted items; Phase III consisted of a pilot study on a population possessing similar characteristics (n = 15); in Phase IV, we analysed reliability by means of a test-retest study (n = 91) and calculated the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs); and in Phase V, we assessed construct validity by applying the known-groups technique, measuring the differences between contrasting groups of physicians formed according to antibiotic prescription quality indicators (group 1, n = 156 versus group 2, n = 191)., Results: Following Phases I and II, the questionnaire contained 16 knowledge and attitude items. Participants in the pilot study (Phase III) reported no difficulty. The test-retest study (Phase IV) showed that 11 of the 16 initial knowledge and attitude items yielded an ICC > 0.5, while analysis of known-groups validity (Phase V) showed that 13 of the 16 initial items which assessed knowledge and attitudes discriminated between physicians with good and bad indicators of antibiotics prescription., Conclusion: The final 11 item KAAR questionnaire appears to be valid, reliable and responsive., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aim: To identify the attitudes and knowledge associated with adverse drug reactions (ADR) under-reporting by nurses., Background: The voluntary reporting system is fundamental for expediting the detection of ADR during post-marketing surveillance., Methods: We performed a case-control study. A self-administered questionnaire was sent by mail to 1325 nurses. The knowledge and attitudes related to ADR under-reporting were primarily based on Inman's seven deadly sins., Results: The overall response rate was 34.2%. Nurses working in primary care were 12-fold more likely to report an ADR. A change of attitude increased the probability of ADR reporting for:'The belief that the one case an individual nurse might see could not contribute to medical knowledge'; 'I do not know how the information reported is used by the system'; 'I would be more likely to report if the method was easier'; 'I think the most correct way to report is to inform the doctor' and 'I do not have time to think about the involvement of the drug in ADRs'., Conclusions: Our study shows that the beliefs of nurses, such as 'one single report would not make any difference' and 'the pharmacovigilance system is very complex', act as a barrier to ADR reporting., Implications for Nursing Management: It is important to clarify the ADR reporting procedure and increase the nurses reporting rate., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Resistance increases with the use and abuse of antibiotics. Since physicians are primarily responsible for the decision to use antibiotics, ascertaining the attitudes and knowledge that underlie their prescribing habits is thus a prerequisite for improving prescription. Three-year follow-up cohort study (2008-2010) targeting primary-care physicians (n = 2100) in Galicia, a region in NW Spain. We used data obtained from a postal survey to assess knowledge and attitudes. A physician was deemed to have demonstrated Appropriate Quality Prescription of Antibiotics (dependent variable) in any case where half or more of the indicators proposed by the European Surveillance of Antimicrobial Consumption had values that were better than the reference values for Spain. The mail-questionnaire response rate was 68·0% (1428/2100). The adjusted increase in the interquartile OR of displaying good prescribing of antibiotics for each attitude was: 205% for fear ("When in doubt, it is better to ensure that a patient is cured of an infection by using a broad-spectrum antibiotic"; 95%CI: 125% to 321%); 119% for better knowledge ("Amoxicillin is useful for resolving most respiratory infections in primary care"; 95%CI: 67% to 193%); and 21% for complacency with patients' demands ("Antibiotics are often prescribed due to patients' demands"; 95%CI: 0% to 45%). Due to the fact that physicians' knowledge and attitudes are potentially modifiable, the implementation of purpose-designed educational interventions based on the attitudes identified may well serve to improve antibiotic prescription.

Purpose: The emergence of microbial resistance is widely associated with inappropriate antibiotic use. Self-medication with antibiotics acquired directly from pharmacies without a medical prescription has been reported by several European countries as being an important cause of such inappropriate use. The goal of this study was to identify and evaluate community pharmacists׳ attitudes toward and knowledge of antibiotics and microbial resistance and to assess what influence, if any, these attitudes might have on their propensity to dispense unprescribed antibiotics., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study covering all community pharmacists registered with the Official College of Pharmacists in Portugal׳s Central Region. A self-administered questionnaire on attitudes toward microbial resistance and antibiotic use was mailed to 1197 pharmacists. Responses ranged from 0 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). Logistic regression was used to model the association between respondents׳ attitudes and their propensity to dispense antibiotics without an earlier medical prescription., Findings: The overall response rate was 64.8%. Agreement with the dispensing of unprescribed antibiotics was highest in the case of dental diseases and ailments, followed by urinary tract infections. Although none of the sociodemographic data were associated with a propensity to dispense antibiotics without a medical prescription, the attitudes shown to be significantly associated with this propensity were complacency about patients, responsibility of others, and precaution or fear., Implications: Because the attitudes of community pharmacists can influence their readiness to dispense unprescribed antibiotics, educational interventions addressing such attitudes should be implemented to improve antibiotic use., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Underreporting is the major limitation of a voluntary adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting system. Many studies have assessed the effectiveness of different interventions designed to reduce underreporting., Objective: We aimed to conduct a critical review of papers that assessed the effectiveness of different strategies to increase ADR reporting, regardless of the health professionals or patients included., Data Sources: Scientific papers were selected after a search of the MEDLINE-PubMed and EMBASE scientific databases up to 7 December 2010., Study Selection: We included papers in English, French or Spanish that analysed an intervention aimed at increasing the number of reported ADRs, and quantify the results of the intervention in terms of number of reports., Data Extraction: The abstracts retrieved in both computerized searches were reviewed independently by two of the authors. Initially selected papers were thoroughly read to evaluate if they met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data in finally selected papers were independently extracted by both authors and set in pre-designed tables. A third author took the final decision in case of disagreement. For each study, we analysed study design, type of intervention, assessment period, and results of the intervention., Results: Of the 4,221 papers located that fulfilled the search criteria, 43 met the selection criteria. With the exception of one study, the interventions assessed were deemed to be effective. The vast majority of papers displayed methodological and formal limitations that lowered the grade of evidence. Multiple interventions seem to have had more impact than did single interventions. There were very few cases in which interventions were designed on the basis of inappropriate attitudes and mistaken beliefs about ADRs., Conclusions: In general, there is a need for studies of better methodological quality in this topic, so that more evidence of the effectiveness of the respective strategies can be collected for the purpose of improving ADR reporting by health professionals. It is probable that multiple interventions cause greater increases in the ADR reporting rates than single.

Inappropriate prescription has been associated with mounting rates of antibiotic resistance worldwide, demanding more detailed studies into physicians' decision-making process. Accordingly, this study sought to explore physicians' perceptions of factors influencing antibiotic prescribing. A systematic search was performed for qualitative studies focused on understanding physicians' perceptions of the factors, attitudes and knowledge influencing antibiotic prescription. Of the total of 35 papers selected for review purposes, 18 solely included physicians and the remaining 17 also included patients and/or other healthcare providers. Data collection was based mainly on interviews, followed by questionnaires and focus groups, and the methodologies mainly used for data analysis were grounded theory and thematic analysis. Factors cited by physicians as having an impact on antibiotic prescribing were grouped into those that were intrinsic (group 1) and those that were extrinsic (group 2) to the healthcare professional. Among the former, physicians' attitudes, such as complacency or fear, were rated as being most influential on antibiotic prescribing, whilst patient-related factors (e.g. signs and symptoms) or healthcare system-related factors (e.g. time pressure and policies/guidelines implemented) were the most commonly reported extrinsic factors. These findings revealed that: (i) antibiotic prescribing is a complex process influenced by factors affecting all the actors involved, including physicians, other healthcare providers, healthcare system, patients and the general public; and (ii) such factors are mutually dependent. Hence, by shedding new light on the process, these findings will hopefully contribute to generating new and more effective strategies for improving antibiotic prescribing and allaying global concern about antibiotic resistance., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier B.V. and the International Society of Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.)

Background: Adverse drug reactions are a major public health problem. Underreporting is an important limitation of all reporting systems, partially due to attitudes of health professionals., Objective: This study sought: (1) to evaluate the reproducibility of a questionnaire on attitudes to and knowledge of adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting among physicians, nurses and pharmacists: and (2) to compare the attitudes and knowledge of these three groups of health professionals., Methods: This study targeted a sample of physicians (n = 30), nurses (n = 30) and pharmacists (n = 20) in the central region of Portugal. A structured questionnaire was administered to each health professional twice, at an interval of 2-4 weeks. Most attitudes were based on Inman's 'seven deadly sins' and measured using a continuous visual analog scale (VAS), with answers scored from 0 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). Questionnaire reproducibility was determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)., Results: The response rate was 100 %. Attitudes that registered the highest ICCs were Complacency (the belief that really serious ADRs are well documented by the time a drug is marketed) (physicians, ICC 0.84; nurses, ICC 0.70; pharmacists, ICC 0.99), and Diffidence (the belief that one would only report an ADR if one were sure that it was related to the use of a particular drug) (physicians, ICC 0.73; nurses, ICC 0.65; pharmacists, ICC 0.98). In most cases, there were no differences among the three groups of professionals in terms of attitudes and knowledge., Conclusions: The Horizontal continuous VAS is reliable to detect the knowledge and attitudes about ADRs.

A voluntary reporting system of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is fundamental to drug safety surveillance but under-reporting is its major limitation. This bibliographic review sought to assess the influence of personal and professional characteristics on ADR reporting and to identify knowledge and attitudes associated with ADR reporting. A systematic review was conducted using the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. We included papers that were published in English, French and Spanish, and covered a study population made up of health professionals. In each case, the following data were extracted: study population; workplace; study type; sample size; type of questionnaire; type of scale for measuring knowledge; response rate; personal and professional factors; and knowledge and attitudes (based on Inman's 'seven deadly sins') associated with reporting. Based on a search of computerized databases, we identified a total of 657 papers in MEDLINE and 973 in EMBASE. In all, the review covered 45 papers that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Medical specialty was the professional characteristic most closely associated with under-reporting in 76% of studies involving physicians. Other factors associated with under-reporting were ignorance (only severe ADRs need to be reported) in 95%; diffidence (fear of appearing ridiculous for reporting merely suspected ADRs) in 72%; lethargy (an amalgam of procrastination, lack of interest or time to find a report card, and other excuses) in 77%; indifference (the one case that an individual doctor might see could not contribute to medical knowledge) and insecurity (it is nearly impossible to determine whether or not a drug is responsible for a particular adverse reaction) in 67%; and complacency (only safe drugs are allowed on the market) in 47% of studies. While personal and professional factors display a weak influence, the knowledge and attitudes of health professionals appear to be strongly related with reporting in a high proportion of studies. This result may have important implications in terms of public health, if knowledge and attitudes are viewed as potentially modifiable factors.

Introduction: Pharmacists can play a fundamental role in adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting, although the factors that affect underreporting among these professionals are unknown. The objectives of this study were to identify (i) professional or demographic characteristics; and (ii) attitudes associated with pharmacists' ADR reporting in northern Portugal., Methods: We conducted a case-control study on a population of pharmacists employed in hospital and community pharmacies across Portugal's Northern Regional Health Authority catchment area in 2003. Cases (n=34) comprised pharmacists who had reported at least one ADR to the northern region's drug surveillance unit, and controls (n=280) were randomly sampled from pharmacists who had never reported an ADR. All were interviewed using a mail questionnaire. Most attitudes were based on Inman's 'seven deadly sins' and were measured using a continuous visual analogue scale. Answers were recorded in a range from 0 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). Logistic regression was used to determine the ADR reporting adjusted odds ratio (OR) for a change in exposure corresponding to the interquartile range for each attitude., Results: The response rate was 86.8%. Reporting probability proved higher among hospital versus community pharmacists (adjusted OR 20.0; 95 CI 3.3, 125.0; p<0.001). Attitudes to ADRs were strongly associated with reporting probability. Hence, an interquartile decrease in any of the following attitudes increased the probability of reporting by (i) 223% (95% CI 51, 595; p < 0.05) for "Really serious ADRs are well documented by the time a drug is marketed"; (ii) 240% (95% CI 89, 508; p=0.002) for "I would only report an ADR if I were sure that it was related to the use of a particular drug"; (iii) 316% (95% CI 44, 1104; p=0.010) for "It is only necessary to report serious or unexpected ADRs"; and (iv) 171% (95% CI 13, 549; p=0.020) for "I do not have time to think about the involvement of the drug or other causes in ADRs"., Conclusions: ADR under-reporting is strongly associated with certain attitudes, possibly indicating that under-reporting could be minimised through educational interventions targeted at changing such attitudes. Pharmacists' ADR education must be improved and educational programmes should be focused on altering attitudes identified by the study as being associated with under-reporting. Our data also indicate that community pharmacists must be a priority target for this intervention.

Objectives: Voluntary adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting is fundamental to medical drug safety surveillance; however, substantial under-reporting exists and is the main limitation of the system. This study sought to identify the knowledge- and attitude-related factors associated with ADR reporting by physicians in Northern Portugal., Methods: Case-control study covering a population of National Health Service medical practitioners. The 88 cases comprised physicians who had reported at least one ADR to the drug surveillance unit from the year 2000 to the date of enrolment in the study. The 771 controls were randomly selected from among the remaining physicians. All interviews were conducted using a self-administered questionnaire. Knowledge and attitudes regarding spontaneous ADR reporting were based on Inman's 'seven deadly sins'. Agreement with the questions included in the questionnaire was measured using a horizontal, continuous visual analogue scale, which was unnumbered. Recorded answers were read in a range from zero (total disagreement) to ten (total agreement). We used logistic regression to determine the ADR reporting adjusted odds ratio (ORadj) for a change in exposure corresponding to the interquartile range for each attitude., Results: A total of 397 questionnaires were received from 731 eligible practitioners (54.3%). Physicians who worked in primary versus hospital care (ORadj 7.74 [95% CI 1.85, 32.30]) and in general medicine (ORadj 1.05 [95% CI 0.30, 3.69]) versus medical specialities were more likely to report ADRs. In contrast, physicians working in the medical-surgical/surgical fields were significantly less likely to report ADRs compared with medical specialists (ORadj 0.10 [95% CI 0.02, 0.46]). Attitudes to ADRs were strongly associated with reporting probability. Hence, an interquartile decrease in any of the following attitudes increased the probability of reporting by: (i) 87% (p < 0.05) for complacency (the belief that really serious ADRs are well documented by the time a drug is marketed); (ii) 109% (p < 0.01) for insecurity (the belief that it is nearly impossible to determine whether a drug is responsible for a particular adverse reaction); (iii) 143% (p < 0.001) for diffidence (the belief that one would only report an ADR if one were sure that it was related to the use of a particular drug); (iv) 220% (p < 0.001) for indifference (the belief that the one case an individual doctor might see could not contribute to medical knowledge); and (v) 71% (p < 0.05) for ignorance (the belief that it is only necessary to report serious or unexpected ADRs)., Conclusion: This study shows that there are attitudes strongly associated with under-reporting. The implementation of purpose-designed educational interventions based on the attitudes identified in this study may serve to improve reporting substantially.

Rationale, Aims and Objectives: The spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) through the yellow card and made concrete by the knowledge and attitudes of doctors, has been rousing a great deal of bibliographical interest in recent years. However, there does not seem to be any actual revision in the theme on which the theoretical models that explain the process of decision in reporting are proposed. In this work an explanatory model of the factors that condition reporting is proposed and a revision of the literature on the subject has also been carried out., Methods: The proposed model is centralized in the medical professional and it considers the habit of reporting as the result of the doctor's formation and his interaction with the environment. The combination of knowledge-attitudes-practices and the theory of the satisfaction of needs seemed very adequate for ADR systematization., Results and Conclusions: The results also indicate that, to improve the participation of health professionals in surveillance systems through spontaneous reporting, it might be necessary to design combined strategies that modify both intrinsic (knowledge, attitudes) and extrinsic (relationship between health professionals and their patients, the national health system and pharmaceutical companies) factors.