Connect
MJA
MJA

Low awareness of adverse drug reaction reporting systems: a consumer survey

Jane Robertson and David A Newby
Med J Aust 2013; 199 (10): 684-686. || doi: 10.5694/mja13.10069

Summary

Objective: To determine levels of public awareness of consumer adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting systems in Australia.

Design, setting and participants: Cross-sectional study conducted in 2012 of residents of the Hunter Valley region of New South Wales, who participated in a computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI), and a national sample, who completed an online Pureprofile survey.

Main outcome measures: Proportion of respondents experiencing ADRs; the type of medicine involved; whether participants reported the adverse event and to whom; awareness and use of existing consumer ADR reporting mechanisms.

Results: There were 2484 CATI respondents and 2497 Pureprofile respondents. Side effects with medicines were very common (46.3% of respondents), most relating to prescription medicines (88.4%). Among respondents who had experienced a side effect, 84.6% reported the event to a health care professional, most often a general practitioner. Awareness of consumer ADR reporting schemes was low (10.4%). Of 217 respondents who had experienced a side effect and were aware of consumer reporting schemes, 46 (21.2%) had reported an ADR using one of these schemes.

Conclusions: Consumers can contribute to our understanding of medicines safety, but there is low awareness of available reporting systems. Some consumers aware of ADR self-reporting systems appear prepared to use them, but promotion of and education on how to use reporting systems are required. Significant resources may be needed to support an enhanced consumer reporting scheme.

  • Jane Robertson1
  • David A Newby2

  • Clinical Pharmacology, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW.


Competing interests:

No relevant disclosures.

  • 1. Pit SW, Byles JE, Cockburn J. Prevalence of self-reported risk factors for medication misadventure among older people in general practice. J Eval Clin Pract 2008; 14: 203-208.
  • 2. Miller GC, Britt HC, Valenti L. Adverse drug events in general practice patients in Australia. Med J Aust 2006; 184: 321-324. <MJA full text>
  • 3. Burgess CL, Holman CD, Satti AG. Adverse drug reactions in older Australians, 1981–2002. Med J Aust 2005; 182: 267-270. <MJA full text>
  • 4. van Hunsel F, Härmark L, van Grootheest K. Review of direct patient reporting of adverse drug reactions: an 11 country survey on behalf of the Monitoring Medicines project. Dec 2010. http://www.monitoringmedicines.org/graphics/26652.pdf (accessed Dec 2012).
  • 5. Therapeutic Goods Administration. Adverse event reporting in Australia in 2011. Canberra: TGA, 2012. http://www.tga.gov.au/pdf/medicines-statistics-2011.pdf (accessed Jan 2013).
  • 6. Panel to Review the Transparency of the Therapeutic Goods Administration. Review to improve the transparency of the Therapeutic Goods Administration: final report June 2011. Canberra: Department of Health and Ageing, 2011. http://www.tga.gov.au/pdf/consult/review-tga-transparency-1101-final-report.pdf (accessed May 2012).
  • 7. Fortnum H, Lee AJ, Rupnik B, Avery A; Yellow Card Study Collaboration. Survey to assess public awareness of patient reporting of adverse drug reactions in Great Britain. J Clin Pharm Ther 2012; 37: 161-165.
  • 8. McGuire T, Moses G. What do consumers contribute to pharmacovigilance? Lessons from the AME line. In: Proceedings of the National Medicines Symposium 2006; 2006 Jun 7-9; Canberra. http://www.icms.com.au/nms2006/abstract/132.htm (accessed May 2012).
  • 9. Avery AJ, Anderson C, Bond CM, et al. Evaluation of patient reporting of adverse drug reactions to the UK ‘Yellow Card Scheme’: literature review, descriptive and qualitative analyses, and questionnaire surveys. Health Technol Assess 2011; 15: 1-234, iii-iv.
  • 10. World Health Organization. Safety monitoring of medical products: reporting system for the general public. Geneva: WHO, 2012. http://www. who.int/medicines/areas/quality_safety/safety_efficacy/EMP_Consumer Reporting_web_v2.pdf (accessed Jun 2013).
  • 11. Berbatis C. Primary care and pharmacy: 3. National adverse reaction reporting and pharmacists in Australia. i2P - Information To Pharmacists 2008; (71). http://archive.i2p. com. au/?page=print/article&id=971 (accessed Jun 2013).
  • 12. Wise J. GPs are urged to report adverse drug reactions after a 37% slump over nine years. BMJ 2013; 346: f690.
  • 13. Lopez-Gonzalez E, Herdeiro MT, Figueiras A. Determinants of under-reporting of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review. Drug Saf 2009; 32: 19-31.
  • 14. Hartley J. Pay doctors to report adverse events. Australian Doctor 2013; 1 Mar. http://www.australiandoctor.com.au/news/latest-news/pay-doctors-to-report-adverse-drug-events-racp (accessed Jun 2013).
  • 15. Forster AJ, Auger C; ISTOP ADE Investigators. Using information technology to improve the monitoring of outpatient prescribing. JAMA Intern Med 2013; 173: 382-384.
  • 16. Heeley E, Riley J, Layton D, et al. Prescription-event monitoring and reporting of adverse drug reactions. Lancet 2001; 358: 1872-1873.

Author

remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Comment
Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Responses are now closed for this article.