Exploring the influencing factors of adverse drug reaction reporting among medical personnel: a COM-B model-based study.

IF 3.3 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice Pub Date : 2024-10-25 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1080/20523211.2024.2417410
Weigao Cheng, Jiayi Du, Chen Chen, Jiajing Cao, Xudong Xia, Xi Yang, Wan Zhang, Xuedong Jia, Yuedong Qi
{"title":"Exploring the influencing factors of adverse drug reaction reporting among medical personnel: a COM-B model-based study.","authors":"Weigao Cheng, Jiayi Du, Chen Chen, Jiajing Cao, Xudong Xia, Xi Yang, Wan Zhang, Xuedong Jia, Yuedong Qi","doi":"10.1080/20523211.2024.2417410","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aims to identify the factors that influence medical workers' enthusiasm for reporting adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Understanding these factors is essential to implement targeted interventions that can improve and refine pharmacovigilance systems.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We adopted the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, and Behavior model (COM-B) model as the theoretical framework and conducted qualitative research using in-depth interviews with clinicians, nurses, pharmacists, and administrators. 24 one-on-one interviews were conducted and audio-recorded. The interviews were transcribed verbatim, and subjected to thematic analysis to uncover the key factors affecting ADR reporting among medical staff.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The participation included 24 healthcare workers from six different healthcare organisations. Analysis revealed that decreased motivation to report ADRs was due to inadequate judgment or inconsistent judgment criteria within the capability domain, poor awareness of ADRs and deficient communication skills within the psychological domain, unclear responsibilities within the motivation domain, and limited or no access to necessary resources within the opportunity domain. Facilitators of ADR reporting included sufficient cognitive and operational abilities, spontaneous and incentivized motivation, clear responsibilities and role expectations, and robust social support.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is a critical need to develop comprehensive interventions that address the identified factors influencing ADR reporting. By improving the motivation of medical staff to report ADRs, the pharmacovigilance system can be significantly improved.</p>","PeriodicalId":16740,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11514403/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20523211.2024.2417410","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study aims to identify the factors that influence medical workers' enthusiasm for reporting adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Understanding these factors is essential to implement targeted interventions that can improve and refine pharmacovigilance systems.

Methods: We adopted the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, and Behavior model (COM-B) model as the theoretical framework and conducted qualitative research using in-depth interviews with clinicians, nurses, pharmacists, and administrators. 24 one-on-one interviews were conducted and audio-recorded. The interviews were transcribed verbatim, and subjected to thematic analysis to uncover the key factors affecting ADR reporting among medical staff.

Results: The participation included 24 healthcare workers from six different healthcare organisations. Analysis revealed that decreased motivation to report ADRs was due to inadequate judgment or inconsistent judgment criteria within the capability domain, poor awareness of ADRs and deficient communication skills within the psychological domain, unclear responsibilities within the motivation domain, and limited or no access to necessary resources within the opportunity domain. Facilitators of ADR reporting included sufficient cognitive and operational abilities, spontaneous and incentivized motivation, clear responsibilities and role expectations, and robust social support.

Conclusion: There is a critical need to develop comprehensive interventions that address the identified factors influencing ADR reporting. By improving the motivation of medical staff to report ADRs, the pharmacovigilance system can be significantly improved.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探索医务人员报告药物不良反应的影响因素:基于 COM-B 模型的研究。
研究背景本研究旨在确定影响医务工作者报告药物不良反应(ADRs)积极性的因素。了解这些因素对于实施有针对性的干预措施以改进和完善药物警戒系统至关重要:我们采用能力、机会、动机和行为模型(COM-B)作为理论框架,通过对临床医生、护士、药剂师和管理人员进行深入访谈来开展定性研究。共进行了 24 次一对一访谈并进行了录音。访谈内容被逐字转录,并进行了主题分析,以揭示影响医务人员报告 ADR 的关键因素:参与调查的人员包括来自 6 家不同医疗机构的 24 名医护人员。分析表明,报告 ADR 的积极性降低的原因包括:能力方面的判断不足或判断标准不一致;心理方面的 ADR 意识淡薄和沟通技巧不足;动机方面的责任不明确;机会方面的必要资源有限或无法获得。ADR报告的促进因素包括足够的认知和操作能力、自发和激励的动机、明确的责任和角色期望以及强大的社会支持:亟需制定综合干预措施,解决已确定的影响 ADR 报告的因素。通过提高医务人员报告 ADR 的积极性,可以显著改善药物警戒系统。
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 去求助
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
期刊最新文献
A quantitative investigation in a territory of Italy on citizens' attitudes towards medicines through the COVID-19 pandemic: the importance of possible indirect effects caused by the pandemic. Cost-effectiveness analysis of genotype-guided optimization of major depression treatment in Qatar. Exploring the influencing factors of adverse drug reaction reporting among medical personnel: a COM-B model-based study. Pharmacovigilance: the evolution of drug safety monitoring. Inhaler personalisation based on peak inspiratory flow (PIF) among dry powder inhaler users: a pilot randomised control trial (RCT) in COPD.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1