Perceptions and barriers of adverse drug reaction reporting within inpatient state psychiatric facilities.

The Mental Health Clinician Pub Date : 2022-08-23 eCollection Date: 2022-08-01 DOI:10.9740/mhc.2022.08.247
Carolyn O'Donnell, Tammie Lee Demler, Charisse Dzierba
{"title":"Perceptions and barriers of adverse drug reaction reporting within inpatient state psychiatric facilities.","authors":"Carolyn O'Donnell, Tammie Lee Demler, Charisse Dzierba","doi":"10.9740/mhc.2022.08.247","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality for hospitalized patients. Health care organizations track ADRs to reduce patient mortality, reduce hospital readmissions, decrease costs, and improve patient care. Differing definitions of ADRs cause confusion among providers, leading to hesitation with ADR reporting. The objective of this study was to understand health care professionals' perspectives of ADR reporting within inpatient state psychiatric facilities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey was sent to 143 health care professionals throughout 25 inpatient state psychiatric facilities within 1 state. The survey assessed the definition of an ADR, confidence in reporting, barriers to reporting, the role of reporting, who should report and review ADRs, and strategies for process improvement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey had a 75.5% response rate with 108 respondents. Most respondents could identify the definition of an ADR, were moderately confident in reporting ADRs, and understood the importance of ADR reporting. Barriers to ADR reporting included the reaction not being serious, a lack of information about the ADR, or not enough clarity on how to report an ADR. Fear of retaliation was an additional barrier to ADR reporting. Training and direction on ADR reporting, education on real versus perceived consequences, a designated point person to aid in reporting, and better access to reporting technology were suggested improvements for ADR reporting.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>From this survey, it is evident that respondents believe improved education and training, improved communication regarding reporting consequences, and consensus on the definition of an ADR would encourage reporting.</p>","PeriodicalId":22710,"journal":{"name":"The Mental Health Clinician","volume":"12 4","pages":"247-253"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/96/53/i2168-9709-12-4-247.PMC9405632.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Mental Health Clinician","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9740/mhc.2022.08.247","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality for hospitalized patients. Health care organizations track ADRs to reduce patient mortality, reduce hospital readmissions, decrease costs, and improve patient care. Differing definitions of ADRs cause confusion among providers, leading to hesitation with ADR reporting. The objective of this study was to understand health care professionals' perspectives of ADR reporting within inpatient state psychiatric facilities.

Methods: A survey was sent to 143 health care professionals throughout 25 inpatient state psychiatric facilities within 1 state. The survey assessed the definition of an ADR, confidence in reporting, barriers to reporting, the role of reporting, who should report and review ADRs, and strategies for process improvement.

Results: The survey had a 75.5% response rate with 108 respondents. Most respondents could identify the definition of an ADR, were moderately confident in reporting ADRs, and understood the importance of ADR reporting. Barriers to ADR reporting included the reaction not being serious, a lack of information about the ADR, or not enough clarity on how to report an ADR. Fear of retaliation was an additional barrier to ADR reporting. Training and direction on ADR reporting, education on real versus perceived consequences, a designated point person to aid in reporting, and better access to reporting technology were suggested improvements for ADR reporting.

Discussion: From this survey, it is evident that respondents believe improved education and training, improved communication regarding reporting consequences, and consensus on the definition of an ADR would encourage reporting.

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
州立精神病院住院病人对药物不良反应报告的看法和障碍。
导言:药物不良反应 (ADR) 是导致住院病人发病和死亡的主要原因。医疗机构追踪药物不良反应以降低患者死亡率、减少再入院率、降低成本并改善患者护理。不同的 ADR 定义会给医疗服务提供者带来困惑,导致他们对 ADR 报告犹豫不决。本研究旨在了解医护人员对州精神病院住院患者 ADR 报告的看法:我们向 1 个州的 25 家州立精神病院的 143 名医护人员发送了一份调查问卷。调查评估了 ADR 的定义、报告的信心、报告的障碍、报告的作用、谁应报告和审查 ADR 以及流程改进策略:调查的回复率为 75.5%,共有 108 位受访者。大多数受访者都能明确 ADR 的定义,对报告 ADR 有一定信心,并了解报告 ADR 的重要性。报告不良反应的障碍包括反应不严重、缺乏有关不良反应的信息或对如何报告不良反应不够清楚。害怕报复是报告 ADR 的另一个障碍。关于 ADR 报告的培训和指导、关于实际后果与感知后果的教育、指定专人协助报告,以及更好地使用报告技术,都是 ADR 报告的改进建议:讨论:从本次调查中可以看出,受访者认为改进教育和培训、加强有关报告后果的沟通以及就 ADR 的定义达成共识将鼓励报告。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Exploring real-world symptom impact and improvement in well-being domains for tardive dyskinesia in VMAT2 inhibitor-treated patients via clinician survey and chart review Impact of Board Certified Psychiatric Pharmacists on improving urinary tract infection antibiotic appropriateness at an acute psychiatric hospital Barriers to access to psychiatric medications in Missouri county jails Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports Intranasal ketamine as a treatment for psychiatric complications of long COVID: A case report
×
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