RESEARCH – June 2010

Detecting and reporting of adverse drug reactions: attitudes and opinions among pharmacists in Southern Estonia


Articles PDF


AIM. Pharmacists are in an ideal position to detect and report on adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The aim of the present study was to analyse the participation of Southern Estonian pharmacists in detecting and reporting ADRs; reasons for not reporting; attitudes to and opinions about the pharmacist’s role in detecting and reporting of ADRs and predictors of attitudes.

METHODS. In total, 92 pharmacists from Southern Estonia participated in the survey. Results. According to the respondents, 63.8% had detected an ADR and 51.6% had reported it or would potentially report  it. The most frequent reasons for not (or potentially not) repoprting an AD was that it was already a well-known ADR (68.5%). Analysis showed that, signifi cantly more often, pharmacists who did not report or potentially would not report an ADR considered it to be an already well-known ADR. Pharmacists agreed most frequently with the statement “ADR reporting is an important contribution to drugs security knowledge” (98.9%).

CONCLUSIONS. Compared to other countries, Estonia has a relatively low rate of detecting ADRs. Attitudes and knowledge play an important role in the reporting of ADRs.