METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a validated self-administered questionnaire. A convenience sample of 147 community pharmacists working in community pharmacies in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

RESULTS: The questionnaire was distributed to 147 pharmacists, of whom 104 responded to the survey, a 70.7% response rate. The mean age of participants was 29 years. The majority (n = 101, 98.1%) had graduated with a bachelorette degree and worked in chain pharmacies (n = 68, 66.7%). Only 23 (22.1%) said they were familiar with the ADR reporting process, and only 21 (20.2%) knew that pharmacists can submit ADR reports online. The majority of the participants (n = 90, 86.5%) had never reported ADRs. Reasons for not reporting ADRs most importantly included lack of awareness about the method of reporting (n = 22, 45.9%), misconception that reporting ADRs is the duty of physician and hospital pharmacist (n = 8, 16.6%) and ADRs in community pharmacies are simple and should not be reported (n = 8, 16.6%). The most common approach perceived by community pharmacists for managing patients suffering from ADRs was to refer him/her to a physician (n = 80, 76.9%).

METHODS: Data on allopurinol ADR reports (2000-2018) were extracted from the Malaysian ADR database. We identified RMMs implemented between 2000 and 2018 from the minutes of relevant meetings and the national pharmacovigilance newsletter. We obtained allopurinol utilization data (2004-2018) from the Pharmaceutical Services Programme. To determine the impact of RMMs on ADR reporting, we considered ADR reports received within 1 year of RMM implementation. We used the Pearson χ2 test to examine the relation between the implementation of RMMs and allopurinol ADR reports.

RESULTS: The 16 RMMs for allopurinol-related SCARs implemented in Malaysia involved nine risk communications, four prescriber or patient educational material, and three health system innovations. Allopurinol utilization decreased by 21.5% from 2004 to 2018. ADR reporting rates for all drugs (n = 144 507) and allopurinol (n = 1747) increased. ADR reports involving off-label use decreased by 6% from 2011. SCARs cases remained between 20% and 50%. RMMs implemented showed statistically significant reduction in ADR reports involving off-label use for August 2014 [χ2(1, N = 258) = 5.32, P = .021] and October 2016 [χ2(1, N = 349) = 3.85, P = .0499].

Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scopus and Nepal Journal Online (NepJOL) databases. 'Adverse Drug Reactions' or 'ADRs' or 'ADR' or 'Adverse drug reaction' or 'AE' or 'Adverse Event' or 'Drug-Induced Reaction' or 'Pharmacovigilance' or 'PV' and 'Nepal'. The search covered 15 years (January 2004 to December 2018) of study on ADRs and PV in Nepal. Only articles retrieved from databases were included, whereas published/unpublished drug bulletins, pharmacy newsletters and thesis were excluded. The articles thus retrieved were recorded, and thereafter analyzed. Word count code was used for the analysis of keywords used in the retrieved articles.

Results: A total of 124 articles were retrieved, with the highest rate of publications in 2006 and 2007, with 16 papers each. Among the articles, 10 (8.1%) were published in Kathmandu University Medical Journal (KUMJ). Single papers were published in 38 different journals. Brief reports (1.6%), case reports (31.2%), case series (0.8%), education forums (0.8%), letters to the editor (5.6%), original research articles (41.9%), review articles (9.7%), short communications and short reports (8.1%) on ADRs and PV were recorded. Out of 124 papers, 52 (41.9%) were original research publications. The majority (74.1%) of research was done in the category of ADR incidence, types, prevention, and management, followed by policy and suggestions for strengthening national and regional pharmacovigilance centers of Nepal (14.5%).

Methods: A qualitative approach was used to conduct this study. A semi-structured interview guide was developed, 10 hospital pharmacists were recruited and interviewed through convenience sampling technique. All interviews were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim, and were then analyzed for thematic contents analysis.

Results: Thematic content analysis of the interviews resulted in 6 major themes, including (1) Familiarity with medication safety & adverse drug reaction concept (2) Current system of practice and reporting of adverse drug reaction in hospital setting, (3) Willingness to accept the practice change (4) Barriers to adverse drug reaction reporting, (5) Policy change needs and (6) The recognition of the role. Majority of the hospital pharmacists were familiar with the concept of medication safety and ADR reactions reporting however they were unaware of the existence of national ADR reporting system in Pakistan. Several barriers hindering ADR reporting were identified including lack of awareness and training, communication gap between the hospitals and regulatory authorities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single-center, cross-sectional study. A face-to-face interview guided by a structured questionnaire with cancer patients admitted to receive repeated cycles of chemotherapy was conducted. Information collected included chemotherapy-related side effects after last chemotherapy experience, the most worrisome side effects, the side effects overlooked by healthcare professionals and the preferred method, amount and source of receiving related information.

RESULTS: Of 99 patients recruited, 90 participated in this survey (response rate: 90.9%). The majority were in the age range of 45-64 years (73.3%) and female (93.3%). Seventy-five (83.3%) and seventy-one (78.9%) experienced nausea and vomiting, respectively. Both symptoms were selected as two of the most worrisome side effects (16.7% vs. 33.3%). Other common and worrisome side effects were hair loss and loss of appetite. Symptoms caused by peripheral neuropathies were perceived as the major symptoms being overlooked (6.7%). Most patients demanded information about side effects (60.0%) and they would like to receive as much information as possible (86.7%). Oral conversation (83.3%) remained as the preferred method and the clinical pharmacist was preferred by 46.7% of patients as the educator in this aspect.