6ER-022 What is pharmacovigilance for you? A survey of 153 pharmacists. (March 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Nchinech, N; Hajjar, I; Tebaa, A; Serragui, S; Soulaymani, R; Cherrah, Y; Bousliman, Y
• Is Part Of: European journal of hospital pharmacy. Volume 26(2019)Supplement 1
• Page Start: A287
• Page End: A287
• Publication Date: 2019-03
• Subjects: Pharmacy -- Periodicals; Hospital pharmacies -- Periodicals; 615.1
• DOI: 10.1136/ejhpharm-2019-eahpconf.619
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2047-9956

Abstract

Abstract : Background: Our national pharmacovigilance system is based on the spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) which requires successful participation of health professionals and pharmacists, in particular their specialisation in medicines and their proximity and availability for the patient. Purpose: To study the knowledge, and the perception of the pharmacists of the largest city of our country in terms of pharmacovigilance. Material and methods: This was a descriptive study conducted in the form of a survey of pharmacists practising in 153 pharmacies in the economic capital of the country, chosen at random, through an anonymous self-administered questionnaire of 19 questions organised around three items, over a period of 4 months from September to December 2017. Results: One-hundred and thirty pharmacists (85%) responded, of whom 40% had experience of less than 10 years. Regarding their pharmacovigilance knowledge, n=108 (83.1%) confirmed that they were aware of the existence of a national pharmacovigilance organisation in our country. Among pharmacists surveyed, 1.7% could not give a definition of pharmacovigilance, while 67.8% defined it as the activity of identifying, assessing and preventing ADRs resulting from the use of drugs. As for their opinion on the ADRs to be reported, the exceptional or unexpected ADRs were the most chosen by respondents with 25.9%. Sixty-four per cent of pharmacists confirmed that they had already been asked about ADRs in patients. But only 10.7% of these reports were sent to competent authorities. Among the proposed answers concerning the under-reporting, the ignorance of the reporting circuit remains the most chosen cause, with a rate of 44.2%. Finally, a more simplified statement was the way to improve the number of statements most cited, with a rate of 32.7%. The other means proposed, with a rate of 1.2%, were continuing education and awareness-raising through the media. Conclusion: This study showed a moderate level of knowledge and a low perception of pharmacovigilance. There is therefore a real interest in sensitising the teams of pharmacists so that they can play their role in the spontaneous reporting of adverse effects. In this context, a national pharmacovigilance awareness day is planned for March 2019. References and/or acknowledgements: Thanks to all the collaborators. No conflict of interest.