Survey and analysis of the cognition and behavioral intention of the public on adverse drug reactions
10.3760/cma.j.cn114015-20190202-00115
- VernacularTitle:公众药品不良反应认知和行为意向的调查分析
- Author:
Daiyong PAN
1
;
Baoyu JIANG
1
;
Xiuyun HUANG
1
Author Information
1. 广西科技大学第一附属医院药学部，广西壮族自治区柳州市 545002
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Drug-related side effects and adverse reactions;
Adverse drug reaction reporting systems;
Patient participation;
Questionnaires
- From:
Adverse Drug Reactions Journal
2020;22(4):252-256
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To understand the condition of the cognition and behavioral intention of the public on adverse drug reactions (ADRs).Methods:On-the-spot questionnaire survey was conducted, using self-designed paper and WeChat questionnaires, on patients or their family members who were waiting to see a doctor or get medicine in the outpatient department in the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Science and Technology from September to December, 2018. The respondents filled in the questionnaires anonymously and the on-site questionnaire recovery was conducted. Qualified questionnaires were screened out by 2 pharmacists. A score and its percentile one were given for each question about the cognition and behavioral intention of ADRs in the questionnaires, and the results were statistically analyzed.Results:A total of 519 questionnaires were collected, of which 508 were qualified, and the effective recovery rate was 97.9%. The median scores of the cognition and behavioral intention of respondents on ADRs were 50 (0, 100) and 86 (36, 100), respectively. Both the scores of cognition and behavioral intention on ADRs in the elderly respondents ≥60 years of age were lower than those in the respondents with 20-39 and 40-59 years of age ( P>0.05 for all). Both the scores of cognition and behavioral intention on ADRs in the respondents with college/university degree were significantly higher than those in the respondents with middle school/secondary professional degree ( P>0.05 for all). Both the scores of cognition and behavioral intention on ADRs in the urban respondents were significantly higher than those in the suburban and rural respondents ( P>0.05 for all). Only 55.9% (284/508) of the respondents knew the right answer to the definition of ADRs, 44.1% (224/508) of the respondents thought that ADRs were caused by medication errors, drug quality, or medical errors, and 62.6% (318/508) of the respondents thought that hospitals, drug manufacturers, and drug regulatory departments should be responsible for the ADRs. After the occurrence of ADRs, 91.9% (467/508) of the respondents expressed their willingness to report it to the relevant departments, but 25.6%(130/508) of them did not know which department the ADRs should be reported to or how to fill in the report form. Conclusions:The cognition of the public on ADRs was relatively lower. Although there was an intention to report ADRs, it was limited by the lower cognition and the lack of knowledge of ADRs reporting departments and channels.
