Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Reporting adverse drug reactions: contribution, knowledge and perception of German pharmacy professionals

  • Research Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background The detection, assessment and prevention of adverse drug reactions along the product’s life cycle is known as pharmacovigilance. German pharmacists are obliged by law to conduct pharmacovigilance measures, a specific training is not required. Objectives To assess the knowledge, contribution and perception of German pharmacy professionals regarding pharmacovigilance activities, in order to identify their needs to report better on the issue. Setting A semi-quantitative survey among German pharmacy professionals was conducted in November 2017. Method A questionnaire with 20 questions was developed and distributed to pharmacy professionals in four different German regions. Main outcome measures To assess the knowledge the number of right answered questions were examined; for perception a six-point-Likert was used and for contribution, yes or no questions. Results The participation ratio was 64.5% (n = 127). Nearly half of the participants (47.2%, n = 60) stated that they had already reported adverse drug reactions. Regarding the knowledge questions, there was neither a statistically significant difference between the correct answers of pharmacists and pharmacy technical assistents (p = 0.7209), nor between the different regions (p > 0.5054). For better reporting, the participants recommended better training, shorter forms to fill in and/or a contact person to call. Conclusion For the successful integration of pharmacovigilance reporting in daily practice, we suggest the following: (1) A structured, mandatory training of the pharmacy team. (2) The preparation of a standard operating procedure for the pharmacy or its integration into the pharmacy software.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. The European Commission. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No. 520/2012 (June 19th 2012).

  2. Arzneimittelgesetz in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 12. Dezember 2005 (BGBl. I S. 3394), das zuletzt durch Artikel 1 des Gesetzes vom 18. Juli 2017 (BGBl. I S. 2757) geändert worden ist. German.

  3. Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte (Internet). Bonn: BfArM. Eingänge zu UAW-Berichten. https://www.bfarm.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Arzneimittel/Pharmakovigilanz/Gremien/RoutinesitzungPar63AMG/80Sitzung/pkt-2-1-1.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2. Accessed 23 Apr 2018. German.

  4. Apothekenbetriebsordnung in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 26. September 1995 (BGBl. I S. 1195), die durch Artikel 11 Absatz 7 des Gesetzes vom 18. Juli 2017 (BGBl. I S. 2745) geändert worden ist. German.

  5. Bundesvereinigung Deutscher Apothekerverbände e.V (Internet). Berlin: ABDA. Referenzapotheken. https://www.abda.de/themen/arzneimittelsicherheit/amk/wir-ueber-uns/referenzapotheken/. Accessed 23 Apr 2018. German.

  6. Borg JJ, Aislaintner G, Pirozynski M, Mifsud S. Strengthening and rationalizing pharmacovigilance in the EU: where is Europe heading to? A review of the new EU legislation on pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf. 2011;34:187–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Keller E. Unerwünschte Arzneimittelwirkungen: Ansätze zur Inzidenzschätzung und Signalgenerierung mit fallbasierten Pharmakovigilanzdaten (dissertation). Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität zu München. 2006. German.

  8. Bundesvereinigung Deutscher Apothekerverbände e.V (Internet). Berlin: ABDA. UAW Berichtsbogen. https://www.abda.de/themen/arzneimittelsicherheit/amk/amk-berichtsboegen/uaw-berichtsbogen/. Accessed 23 Apr 2018. German.

  9. Arzneimittelkommission der deutschen Ärzteschaft (Internet). Berlin: AkdÄ. Bericht über unerwünschte Arzneimittelwirkungen. https://www.dcgma.org/uaw-meldung/. Accessed 23 Apr 2018. German.

  10. Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte (Internet). Bonn: BfArM. Meldung von Verdachtsfällen unerwünschter Arzneimittelwirkungen und Impfkomplikationen. https://humanweb.pei.de/index_form.php. Accessed 23 Apr 2018. Accessible after Login. German.

  11. Paul-Ehrlich Institut (Internet). Langen: PEI. Meldung von Verdachtsfällen unerwünschter Arzneimittelwirkungen und Impfkomplikationen. https://humanweb.pei.de/index_form.php. Accessed 23 Apr 2018. Accessible after Login. German.

  12. European Medicines Agency (Internet). London: EMA. EudraVigilance: electronic reporting. http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/regulation/general/general_content_000686.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac0580a69261. Accessed 23 Apr 2018.

  13. R Development Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Version 3.3.2 (software). Vienna: The R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/. Accessed 23 Apr 2018.

  14. Embryotox (Internet). Berlin: Pharmakovigilanz- und Beratungszentrum für Embryonaltoxikologie Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin. http://www.embryotox.de. Accessed 23 Apr 2018. German.

  15. Hazell L, Shakir S. Under-reporting of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review. Drug Saf. 2006;29:385–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Alsaleh FM, Alzaid SW, Abahussain EA, Bayoud T, Lemay J. Knowledge, attitude and practices of pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reaction reporting among pharmacists working in secondary and tertiary governmental hospitals in Kuwait. Saudi Pharm J. 2017;25:830–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Su C, Ji H, Su Y. Hospital pharmacists’ knowledge and opinions regarding adverse drug reaction reporting in Northern China. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2010;19:217–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dorji C, Tragulpiankit P, Riewpaiboon A, Tobgay T. Knowledge of adverse drug reaction reporting among healthcare professionals in Bhutan: a cross-sectional survey. Drug Saf. 2016;39:1239–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Santosh KC, Tragulpiankit P, Gorsanan S, Edwards IR. Attitudes among healthcare professionals to the reporting of adverse drug reactions in Nepal. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. 2013;14:16.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Ali MD, Hassan YA, Ahmad A, Almahmoud S, Alagel O, Al-Harbi HK, et al. Knowledge, practice and attitudes toward pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reactions reporting process among health care providers in Dammam, Saudi Arabia. Curr Drug Saf. 2017;2018(13):21–5.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Pimpalkhute SA, Jaiswal KM, Sontakke SD, Bajait CS, Gaikwad A. Evaluation of awareness about pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reaction monitoring in resident doctors of a tertiary care teaching hospital. Indian J Med Sci. 2012;66:55–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Santosh KC, Tragulpiankit P, Edwards IR, Gorsanan S. Knowledge about adverse drug reactions reporting among health care professionals in Nepal. Int J Risk Saf Med. 2013;25:1–16.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Chhabra KG, Sharma A, Chhabra C, Reddy JJ, Deolia SG, Mittal Y. Knowledge, attitude, and practices regarding pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reaction reporting among dental students in a Teaching Hospital, Jodhpur, India: a cross-sectional study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2017;18:964–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Terblanche A, Meyer JC, Godman B, Summers RS. Knowledge, attitudes and perspective on adverse drug reaction reporting in a public-sector hospital in South Africa: baseline analysis. South Afr Hosp Pract. 1995;2017(45):238–45.

    Google Scholar 

  25. DESTATIS (Internet). Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt Gesundheit: Personal. https://www.destatis.de/DE/Publikationen/Thematisch/Gesundheit/Gesundheitspersonal/Personal.html, Article No. 2120731157004. Accessed 23 Apr 2018. German.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Julia Franzen for the statistical analysis in R, John Bradshaw for language editing and the participating pharmacists and PTAs for their time and dedication to furthering the understanding of pharmacovigilance patterns in German pharmacies.

Funding

Funding

This study was not supported financially.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pharmabrain GmbH, Research and Training Center, Schumannstr. 7b, 10117, Berlin, Germany

    Anna Laven & Katharina Schmitz

  2. Takeda Pharma Vertrieb GmbH & Co. KG, Jaegerstr. 27, 10117, Berlin, Germany

    Wilhelm-Hubertus Franzen

Authors
  1. Anna Laven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Katharina Schmitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wilhelm-Hubertus Franzen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna Laven.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

Both LA and SK work for Pharmabrain, a company specialising in continuing education for pharmacy teams. FWH declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Laven, A., Schmitz, K. & Franzen, WH. Reporting adverse drug reactions: contribution, knowledge and perception of German pharmacy professionals. Int J Clin Pharm 40, 842–851 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-018-0671-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-018-0671-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation