Educational interventions in pharmacovigilance to improve the knowledge, attitude and the report of adverse drug reactions in healthcare professionals: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Mónica J Cervantes-Arellano; Osvaldo D Castelán-Martínez; Yolanda Marín-Campos; Juan L Chávez-Pacheco; Olga Morales-Ríos; Laura M Ubaldo-Reyes

doi:10.1007/s40199-024-00508-z

Educational interventions in pharmacovigilance to improve the knowledge, attitude and the report of adverse drug reactions in healthcare professionals: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Daru. 2024 Mar 1. doi: 10.1007/s40199-024-00508-z. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Mónica J Cervantes-Arellano¹, Osvaldo D Castelán-Martínez², Yolanda Marín-Campos³, Juan L Chávez-Pacheco⁴, Olga Morales-Ríos⁵, Laura M Ubaldo-Reyes¹

Affiliations

¹ Anatomy Department, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Mexico City, Mexico.
² Clinical Pharmacology Laboratory, UMIEZ, Facultad de Estudios Superiores Zaragoza, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Batalla 5 de Mayo s/n Esquina Fuerte de Loreto, Col. Ejército de Oriente, Iztapalapa, Mexico City, C.P. 09230, Mexico. castelan@unam.mx.
³ Pharmacology Department, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Mexico City, Mexico.
⁴ Clinical Pharmacology Laboratory, Instituto Nacional de Pediatría, Mexico City, Mexico.
⁵ Unidad Habilitada de Apoyo al Predictamen, Hospital Infantil de México Federico Gómez, Mexico City, Mexico.

PMID: 38427161
DOI: 10.1007/s40199-024-00508-z

Abstract

Objectives: Underreporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) limits and delays the detection of signs. The aim of this systematic review with meta-analyses was to synthesize the evidence of educational interventions (EIs) efficacy in health professionals to increase ADR reporting, attitudes, and knowledge of pharmacovigilance.

Evidence acquisition: A systematic literature review was carried out to identify randomized clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of EI in pharmacovigilance in health professionals to improve ADR reports, knowledge, and attitude toward pharmacovigilance. ADR reports were pooled by calculating Odds Ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (95%CI), while pharmacovigilance knowledge and attitude were pooled by calculating a mean difference (MD) with 95%CI. In addition, the subanalysis was performed by EI type. Meta-analysis was performed with RevMan 5.4 software. PROSPERO registry CRD42021254270.

Results: Eight hundred seventy-five articles were identified as potentially relevant, and 11 were included in the systematic review. Metanalysis showed that EI increased ADR reporting in comparison with control group (OR = 4.74, [95%CI, 2.46 to 9.12], I² = 93%, 5 studies). In subgroup analysis, the workshops (OR = 6.26, [95%CI, 4.03 to 9.73], I² = 57%, 3 studies) increased ADR reporting more than telephone-based interventions (OR = 2.59, [95%CI, 0.77 to 8.73], I² = 29%, 2 studies) or combined interventions (OR = 5.14, [95%CI, 0.97 to 27.26], I² = 93%, 3 studies). No difference was observed in pharmacovigilance knowledge. However, the subanalysis revealed that workshops increase pharmacovigilance knowledge (SMD = 1.85 [95%CI, 1.44 to 2.27], 1 study). Only one study evaluated ADR reporting attitude among participants and showed a positive effect after the intervention.

Conclusion: EI improves ADR reports and increases pharmacovigilance knowledge. Workshops are the most effective EI to increase ADR reporting.

Keywords: Adverse drug reaction reporting; Educational interventions; Meta-analysis; Pharmacovigilance; Systematic review.

Publication types

Review