Enhancing medication risk communication in developing countries: A cross-sectional survey among doctors and pharmacists in Malaysia

• Main Authors: Panickar, Rema, Aziz, Zoriah, Kamarulzaman, Adeeba
• Format: Article
• Published: BioMed Central 2022
• Subjects: R Medicine
• Online Access: http://eprints.um.edu.my/41870/

Background Medication risk communication is essential to ensure the safe use of medicines. However, very few nations worldwide have established effective risk communication systems. To date, the effectiveness of risk communication among healthcare professionals in Malaysia has never been evaluated. Our study aimed to (i) evaluate doctors' and pharmacists' awareness of regulatory risk communication methods; (ii) identify factors predicting the usefulness of these methods; and (iii) compare respondents' preferences for risk communication to outline suggestions for enhancement. Methods We conducted a nationwide cross-sectional survey covering four commonly used risk communications, namely a national drug bulletin, safety alerts, Direct Healthcare Professional Communication letters (DHPCs), and educational materials. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to determine the association between independent variables and the usefulness of risk communication. We performed qualitative analysis of free-text responses to gain insights on respondents' perspectives on risk communication. Results Of the 1146 responses received, 650 were from pharmacists (56.7%). Among the four methods surveyed, 71.5% of respondents were aware of educational materials, while awareness of the other three methods ranged from 20.7 to 53.9%. Pharmacists had higher awareness of all four methods compared to doctors. Private sector respondents were more aware of DHPCs compared to those from the public sector. The strongest predictors for finding risk communication useful were being a pharmacist odds ratio (OR) = 18.2; 95% CI: 10.98-30.07; p < 0.001], having >= 30 years' work experience OR = 4.9; 95% CI: 1.98-12.08; p < 0.001], and working in the pharmaceutical industry OR = 4.6; 95% CI: 1.08-19.72; p = 0.039]. Both doctors and pharmacists preferred risk communication in the English-language and electronic format. However, other preferences differed between the professions and sectors. Analysis of free-text comments revealed five core themes to guide risk communication enhancement strategies. Conclusions Risk communication awareness differed between public and private sector doctors and pharmacists depending on communication source. Integrating our findings with the theory of effective communication, we provide suggestions for developing strategic plans on enhancing risk communication. Public-private sector collaboration is key in ensuring risk communication effectiveness.