Display options
Cite
Hohl CM, Small SS, Peddie D, et al. Why Clinicians Don't Report Adverse Drug Events: Qualitative Study. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2018;4(1):e21doi: 10.2196/publichealth.9282.
Hohl, C. M., Small, S. S., Peddie, D., Badke, K., Bailey, C., & Balka, E. (2018). Why Clinicians Don't Report Adverse Drug Events: Qualitative Study. JMIR public health and surveillance, 4(1), e21. https://doi.org/10.2196/publichealth.9282
Hohl, Corinne M, et al. "Why Clinicians Don't Report Adverse Drug Events: Qualitative Study." JMIR public health and surveillance vol. 4,1 (2018): e21. doi: https://doi.org/10.2196/publichealth.9282
Hohl CM, Small SS, Peddie D, Badke K, Bailey C, Balka E. Why Clinicians Don't Report Adverse Drug Events: Qualitative Study. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2018 Feb 27;4(1):e21. doi: 10.2196/publichealth.9282. PMID: 29487041; PMCID: PMC5849794.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2018 Feb 27;4(1):e21. doi: 10.2196/publichealth.9282.

Why Clinicians Don't Report Adverse Drug Events: Qualitative Study.

JMIR public health and surveillance

Corinne M Hohl, Serena S Small, David Peddie, Katherin Badke, Chantelle Bailey, Ellen Balka

Affiliations

  1. Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  2. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  3. Vancouver General Hospital Emergency Department, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  4. School of Communication, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada.
  5. Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

PMID: 29487041 PMCID: PMC5849794 DOI: 10.2196/publichealth.9282

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Adverse drug events are unintended and harmful events related to medications. Adverse drug events are important for patient care, quality improvement, drug safety research, and postmarketing surveillance, but they are vastly underreported.

OBJECTIVE: Our objectives were to identify barriers to adverse drug event documentation and factors contributing to underreporting.

METHODS: This qualitative study was conducted in 1 ambulatory center, and the emergency departments and inpatient wards of 3 acute care hospitals in British Columbia between March 2014 and December 2016. We completed workplace observations and focus groups with general practitioners, hospitalists, emergency physicians, and hospital and community pharmacists. We analyzed field notes by coding and iteratively analyzing our data to identify emerging concepts, generate thematic and event summaries, and create workflow diagrams. Clinicians validated emerging concepts by applying them to cases from their clinical practice.

RESULTS: We completed 238 hours of observations during which clinicians investigated 65 suspect adverse drug events. The observed events were often complex and diagnosed over time, requiring the input of multiple providers. Providers documented adverse drug events in charts to support continuity of care but never reported them to external agencies. Providers faced time constraints, and reporting would have required duplication of documentation.

CONCLUSIONS: Existing reporting systems are not suited to capture the complex nature of adverse drug events or adapted to workflow and are simply not used by frontline clinicians. Systems that are integrated into electronic medical records, make use of existing data to avoid duplication of documentation, and generate alerts to improve safety may address the shortcomings of existing systems and generate robust adverse drug event data as a by-product of safer care.

©Corinne M Hohl, Serena S Small, David Peddie, Katherin Badke, Chantelle Bailey, Ellen Balka. Originally published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance (http://publichealth.jmir.org), 27.02.2018.

Keywords: adverse drug event; adverse drug reaction; adverse events; drug safety; electronic health records; information and technology; medication reconciliation; pharmacovigilance; qualitative research

References

  1. Springerplus. 2016 Oct 11;5(1):1764 - PubMed
  2. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2005 Nov-Dec;32(6):413-20 - PubMed
  3. Can J Clin Pharmacol. 2007 Winter;14(1):e45-57 - PubMed
  4. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2011 Jul;72(1):143-52 - PubMed
  5. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014 May-Jun;21(3):547-57 - PubMed
  6. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1996 May;41(5):434-5 - PubMed
  7. BMJ Qual Saf. 2017 May;26(5):350-353 - PubMed
  8. JAMA. 2003 Mar 5;289(9):1107-16 - PubMed
  9. CMAJ. 2015 Aug 11;187(11):789-90 - PubMed
  10. Drug Saf. 2009;32(1):19-31 - PubMed
  11. Drug Saf. 2006;29(5):385-96 - PubMed
  12. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016 Oct;82(4):1048-57 - PubMed
  13. Drug Saf. 2010 Jul 1;33(7):535-8 - PubMed
  14. CMAJ. 2008 Jun 3;178(12):1563-9 - PubMed
  15. Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Aug 09;1:75-92 - PubMed
  16. Acad Emerg Med. 2012 Jun;19(6):640-9 - PubMed
  17. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2013 Apr;4(2):73-90 - PubMed
  18. Ann Emerg Med. 2001 Dec;38(6):666-71 - PubMed
  19. Drug Saf. 2000 Aug;23 (2):165-72 - PubMed
  20. JAMA. 1998 Apr 15;279(15):1200-5 - PubMed
  21. JMIR Res Protoc. 2016 Aug 18;5(3):e169 - PubMed
  22. Ann Intern Med. 2004 May 18;140(10):795-801 - PubMed
  23. JAMA. 1997 Jan 22-29;277(4):301-6 - PubMed
  24. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2014 Aug;48(4):739-47 - PubMed
  25. Res Nurs Health. 2000 Aug;23(4):334-40 - PubMed
  26. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2011 Dec;20(12):1295-302 - PubMed
  27. N Engl J Med. 2011 Nov 24;365(21):2002-12 - PubMed

Publication Types