Pharmacy World & Science

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 183–187 | Cite as

Knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of pharmacists to adverse drug reaction reporting in Iran

  • Ghazal VessalEmail author
  • Zeinab Mardani
  • Mehri Mollai
Research Article


Objective Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) are a major cause of patient morbidity and mortality. Spontaneous reporting of ADRs remains the cornerstone of pharmacovigilance and is important in maintaining patient safety. In order to determine whether our pharmacovigilance system could be improved, and identify reasons for under-reporting, a study to investigate the role of pharmacists in ADR reporting was performed in Shiraz. Setting: The pharmacies in Shiraz, capital of Fars province in Iran. Methods A questionnaire was prepared to investigate knowledge and attitude of pharmacists regarding ADR reporting. The questionnaire was given to 200 pharmacists who participated in a pharmacist association meeting. Main outcomes measured: The knowledge of pharmacovigilance practice, reasons for not reporting ADR, and perceptions of the Iranian pharmacists on pharmacovigilance practice were evaluated Results The response rate was 55% (n = 110). 29% of the respondents were not aware of the Iranian Pharmacovigilance Center. More than half of those responding felt that ADR reporting should be voluntary, while 26% felt it was a professional obligation. As for the purposes of ADR reporting scheme, 60% of the pharmacists falsely believed that monitoring ADR spontaneous reports aims at measuring the incidence of ADR. 42% of the pharmacists indicated that they have suspected an ADR without reporting it. Doubt about causality was the major reason for not reporting an ADR. Although our ADR center states that all suspected reactions to any drug on the market must be reported, only 17% of the respondents seemed to be aware of this responsibility. Conclusion Our pharmacists have little knowledge regarding the operation, purposes, and usefulness of ADR spontaneous reporting system. However, education and training will be important in maintaining and increasing ADR reports from pharmacists.


Knowlege Attitude Perception Pharmacist Adverse drug reaction Pharmacovigilance Iran 



The authors thank Dr. Hashem Montaseri, Vice Chancellor for Food and Drug Organization, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, for his support.



Conflict of interest



  1. 1.
    Pirmohamed M, Breckenridge A, Kitteringham N, Park BK. Adverse drug reactions. BMJ. 1998;316:1295–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Classen DC, Pestotnik SL, Evans RS, Lloyd JF, Burke JP. Adverse drug events in hospitalized patients. excess length of stay, extra costs, and attributable mortality. JAMA. 1997;277(4):301–6. doi: 10.1001/jama.277.4.301.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Muehlberger N, Schneeweiss S, Hasford J. Adverse drug reaction monitoring-Cost and benefit considerations part I: frequency of adverse drug reactions causing hospital admissions. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 1997;6(3):S71–7. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1557(199710)6:3+<S71::AID-PDS282>3.3.CO;2-9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PH. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. JAMA. 1998;279(15):1200–5. doi: 10.1001/jama.279.15.1200.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Johnson JA, Bootman JL. Drug-related morbidity and mortality. a cost-of-illness model. Arch Intern Med. 1995;155:1949–56. doi: 10.1001/archinte.155.18.1949.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wiholm BE, Olsson S, Moore N, Wood S. Spontaneous reporting systems outside the United States. In: Strom BL, editor. Pharmacoepidemiology. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 1994. p. 139–55.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ramezani Tehrani B, Javid Nikoo N. Report of the Iranian Pharmacovigilance Center. Razi J. 2007;12:85–90. Article in Persian.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Roberts PI, Wolfson DJ, Booth TG. The role of pharmacists in adverse drug reaction reporting. Drug Saf. 1994;11(1):7–11. doi: 10.2165/00002018-199411010-00002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Eland IA, Belton KJ, van Grootheest AC, Meiners AP, Rawlins MD, Stricker BHC. Attitudinal survey of voluntary reporting of adverse drug reactions. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1999;48:623–7. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2125.1999.00060.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bateman DN, Sanders GLS, Rawling MD. Attitudes to adverse drug reaction reporting in the northern region. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1992;34:421–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Belton K. The European Pharmacovigilance Research Group. attitude survey of adverse drug reaction reporting by healthcare professionals across the European Union. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1997;52:423–7. doi: 10.1007/s002280050314.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Green CF, Mottram DR, et al. Attitudes and knowledge of hospital pharmacists to adverse drug reaction reporting. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2001;51:81–6. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2125.2001.01306.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee KK, Chan TY, Raymond K, Critchley JA. Pharmacists’ attitudes toward adverse drug reactions reporting in Hong Kong. Ann Pharmacother. 1994;28(12):1400–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sweis D, Wong IC. A survey on factors that could affect adverse drug reaction reporting according to hospital pharmacists in Great Britain. Drug Saf. 2000;23(2):165–72. doi: 10.2165/00002018-200023020-00006.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Generali JA, Danish MA, Rosenbaum SE. Knowledge of and attitudes about adverse drug reaction reporting among Rhode Island pharmacists. Ann Pharmacother. 1995;29(4):365–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Herdeiro MT, Figueiras A, Polonia J, Gestal-Otero JJ. Influence of pharmacists’ attitudes on adverse drug reactions reporting: a case control study in Portugal. Drug Saf. 2006;29(4):331–40. doi: 10.2165/00002018-200629040-00004.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zerrin Toklu H, Uysal MK. The knowledge and attitude of the Turkish community pharmacists toward pharmacovigilance in the Kadikoy district of Istanbul. Pharm World Sci. 2008;30(5):556–62. doi: 10.1007/s11096-008-9209-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Granas AG, Buajordet M, Stenberg-Nilsen H, et al. Pharmacists’ attitudes toward the reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions in Norway. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2007;16:429–34. doi: 10.1002/pds.1298.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hasford J, Goettler K, et al. Physician’s knowledge and attitudes regarding the spontaneous reporting system for adverse drug reactions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55:945–50. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(02)00450-X.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Walker SR, Lumley CE. The attitudes of general practitioners to the monitoring and reporting of adverse drug reactions. Pharm Med. 1986;1:195–203.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lumley CE, Walker SR, Hall GC, Staunton N, Grob PR. The under-reporting of adverse drug reactions seen in general practice. Pharm Med. 1986;1:205–12.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Belton KJ, Lewis SC, Payne S, Rawlins MD, Wood S. Attitudinal survey of adverse drug reaction reporting by medical practitioners in the United Kingdom. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1995;39(3):223–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cosentino M, Leoni O, et al. Attitudes to adverse drug reaction reporting by medical practitioners in a northern Italian district. Pharmacol Res. 1997;35(2):85–8. doi: 10.1006/phrs.1996.0138.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of PharmacyShiraz University of Medical SciencesShirazIran

Personalised recommendations