4.5 Article

Regulatory authority and clinical acceptability: Physicians' responses to regulatory drug safety warnings

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
卷 88, 期 2, 页码 713-722

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.15007

关键词

drug safety; pharmacovigilance; prescriber attitudes; qualitative methods; risk communication

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [153275]
  2. National Health and Medical Research Council [1122332]
  3. School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney
  4. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [1122332] Funding Source: NHMRC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that factors such as trust, uncertainty, and clinical authority influenced physicians' use of regulatory warnings. Specialists became aware of drug safety issues through specialized literature, while primary care physicians relied on media and colleagues for information.
Aims Medicines regulators issue post-market safety warnings to advise of newly uncovered risks, but with mixed impacts. We aimed to identify factors influencing the use of regulatory warnings by primary care and specialist physicians in the US and Australia. Methods Semi-structured qualitative interviews were carried out with 40 primary care physicians, endocrinologists and other generalist specialists in Boston (USA) and Australia. Coding and analysis were performed inductively and iteratively to identify and examine key factors. Analysis centred around four areas: physicians' awareness of drug safety information, preferred information sources, opinion-forming and sharing of information with patients. Results Uncertainty, trust and clinical authority emerged as factors influencing use of advisories. Although regulators were trusted as authoritative institutions, they appeared to lack clinical authority, and physicians validated regulatory information against other trusted sources including evidence, expert opinion and experience. Specialists became aware of drug safety issues through specialised literature, using evidence and clinical consensus to form opinions. Primary care physicians, fielding high volumes of information, relied on convenient, accessible information sources including the media and the clinical grapevine for awareness, and on clinical colleagues, specialists and experience for interpretation. Communicating risk to patients was complicated by uncertainty; physicians tailored information to patients' health literacy and information needs. US physicians were more aware of their national regulator's post-market safety role than Australian physicians of theirs. Conclusion Drug safety warnings may not be optimally received or used. Regulators should consider strategies that increase trust, clinical relevance and accessibility, and address physicians' needs in communicating risk to patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据