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.