Attitudes to adverse drug reactions and their reporting among medical practitioners

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorRobins, A H
dc.contributor.authorWeir, M
dc.contributor.authorBiersteker, E M
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-08T07:17:49Z
dc.date.available2021-10-08T07:17:49Z
dc.date.issued1987
dc.description.abstractThe adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting rate within the medical profession is exceptionally low, and doctors' approaches and attitudes to ADRs were explored through personal structured interviews. The total sample comprised 104 doctors in private practice, divided into three groups: 59 general practitioners, 26 medical specialists and 19 surgical specialists. Certain differences emerged between the groups. The surgical group observed far fewer ADRs than the other groups and not a single member had ever reported an ADR. A significantly larger number of medical specialists considered it necessary to report an ADR to an outside agency, while general practitioners tended to believe that only newly released medicines required ADR reporting. However, few doctors of any specialty regarded ADR reporting as part of the action they would take in their handling of ADRs in practice. The commonest explanation advanced for the marked underreporting of ADRs was that unusual or serious reactions were very infrequent and the common or trivial ones did not warrant reporting. Apathy and indifference were rated as the next most pertinent influence in non-compliance, while such factors as fear of personal consequences (e.g. criticism, medicolegal action) and uncertainty about what to report were deemed to be relatively unimportant.
dc.identifier.apacitationRobins, A. H., Weir, M., & Biersteker, E. M. (1987). Attitudes to adverse drug reactions and their reporting among medical practitioners. <i>South African Medical Journal</i>, 72(2), 131 - 4. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/34831en_ZA
dc.identifier.chicagocitationRobins, A H, M Weir, and E M Biersteker "Attitudes to adverse drug reactions and their reporting among medical practitioners." <i>South African Medical Journal</i> 72, 2. (1987): 131 - 4. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/34831en_ZA
dc.identifier.citationRobins, A.H., Weir, M. & Biersteker, E.M. 1987. Attitudes to adverse drug reactions and their reporting among medical practitioners. <i>South African Medical Journal.</i> 72(2):131 - 4. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/34831en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn0038-2469
dc.identifier.ris TY - Journal Article AU - Robins, A H AU - Weir, M AU - Biersteker, E M AB - The adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting rate within the medical profession is exceptionally low, and doctors' approaches and attitudes to ADRs were explored through personal structured interviews. The total sample comprised 104 doctors in private practice, divided into three groups: 59 general practitioners, 26 medical specialists and 19 surgical specialists. Certain differences emerged between the groups. The surgical group observed far fewer ADRs than the other groups and not a single member had ever reported an ADR. A significantly larger number of medical specialists considered it necessary to report an ADR to an outside agency, while general practitioners tended to believe that only newly released medicines required ADR reporting. However, few doctors of any specialty regarded ADR reporting as part of the action they would take in their handling of ADRs in practice. The commonest explanation advanced for the marked underreporting of ADRs was that unusual or serious reactions were very infrequent and the common or trivial ones did not warrant reporting. Apathy and indifference were rated as the next most pertinent influence in non-compliance, while such factors as fear of personal consequences (e.g. criticism, medicolegal action) and uncertainty about what to report were deemed to be relatively unimportant. DA - 1987 DB - OpenUCT DP - University of Cape Town IS - 2 J1 - South African Medical Journal LK - https://open.uct.ac.za PY - 1987 SM - 0038-2469 T1 - Attitudes to adverse drug reactions and their reporting among medical practitioners TI - Attitudes to adverse drug reactions and their reporting among medical practitioners UR - http://hdl.handle.net/11427/34831 ER - en_ZA
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11427/34831
dc.identifier.vancouvercitationRobins AH, Weir M, Biersteker EM. Attitudes to adverse drug reactions and their reporting among medical practitioners. South African Medical Journal. 1987;72(2):131 - 4. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/34831.en_ZA
dc.publisher.departmentDepartment of Surgery
dc.publisher.facultyFaculty of Health Sciences
dc.sourceSouth African Medical Journal
dc.source.journalissue2
dc.source.journalvolume72
dc.source.pagination131 - 4
dc.source.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.7196/sajs.718
dc.subject.otherAttitude of Health Personnel
dc.subject.otherDrug Information Services
dc.subject.otherDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
dc.subject.otherGeneral Surgery
dc.subject.otherPhysicians
dc.subject.otherPhysicians, Family
dc.subject.otherPrivate Practice
dc.subject.otherSouth Africa
dc.subject.otherSurveys and Questionnaires
dc.titleAttitudes to adverse drug reactions and their reporting among medical practitioners
dc.typeJournal Article
uct.type.publicationResearch
uct.type.resourceJournal Article
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
RobinsAH_Attitudes_to_ad_1987.pdf
Size:
2.95 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
Collections
Journal Articles