Barriers and facilitators for preventing adverse drug reactions of long latency: a qualitative study.

Caplan L, Haverhals LM. Barriers and facilitators for preventing adverse drug reactions of long latency: a qualitative study. The International journal of risk & safety in medicine. 2012 Jan 1; 24(2):81-94.

Related HSR&D Project(s)

• CDA 07-221 – Preventing Long-term Adverse Drug Reactions: Glucocorticoids as a Model

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: To understand the practices medical care providers and health care staff utilize in managing and preventing Adverse Drug Reactions of Long Latency (ADRLLs) among their patients on medications such as glucocorticoids. DESIGN: Qualitative study of key informant interviews. SETTING: Denver Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center. PARTICIPANTS: Fourteen physician providers and health care staff (nurses and pharmacists) in primary care and rheumatology. METHODS: A trained interviewer conducted semi-structured interviews in which providers and health care staff were asked about their processes for tracking and averting ADRLLs. PARTICIPANTS were asked about barriers and facilitators to monitoring ADRLLs and solicited for suggestions to improve existing processes. Interviews were analyzed using ATLAS.ti software. RESULTS: Providers overwhelmingly commented on barriers, rather than facilitators. Six core themes emerged regarding ADRLL management barriers: patient noncompliance, provider workload, complications coordinating care, provider unfamiliarity with ADRLLs, lack of a standardized monitoring system, and communication failures. Ideas to improve the monitoring of ADRLLs fell into two domains: improving automated computer generated reminders or assigning a specific person to monitor potential ADRLLs. CONCLUSIONS: Interviewees strongly endorsed a more systematic approach to ADRLL management, either through less intrusive computer-generated system reminders or through a dedicated staff person, such as a pharmacist, who could more closely monitor potential ADRLLs. There was disagreement among interviewees about who is responsible for monitoring ADRLLs (specialists versus primary care providers, VA versus non-VA providers, residents versus attending physicians).