Abstract:Adverse drug events, encompassing both adverse drug reactions and medication errors, pose a significant threat to health, leading to illness and, in severe cases, death. Timely and voluntary reporting of adverse drug events by healthcare professionals plays a crucial role in mitigating the morbidity and mortality linked to unexpected reactions and improper medication usage. To assess the effectiveness of different interventions aimed at healthcare professionals to improve the reporting of adverse drug events. We searched CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE and several other electronic databases and trials registers, including ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP, from inception until 14 October 2022. We also screened reference lists in the included studies and relevant systematic reviews. We included randomised trials, non‐randomised controlled studies, controlled before‐after studies, interrupted time series studies (ITS) and repeated measures studies, assessing the effect of any intervention aimed at healthcare professionals and designed to increase adverse drug event reporting. Eligible comparators were healthcare professionals' usual reporting practice or a different intervention or interventions designed to improve adverse drug event reporting rate. We excluded studies of interventions targeted at adverse event reporting following immunisation. Our primary outcome measures were the total number of adverse drug event reports (including both adverse drug reaction reports and medication error reports) and the number of false adverse drug event reports (encompassing both adverse drug reaction reports and medication error reports) submitted by healthcare professionals. Secondary outcomes were the number of serious, high‐causality, unexpected or previously unknown, and new drug‐related adverse drug event reports submitted by healthcare professionals. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. We followed standard methods recommended by Cochrane and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group. We extracted and reanalysed ITS study data and imputed treatment effect estimates (including standard errors or confidence intervals) for the randomised studies. We included 15 studies (eight RCTs, six ITS, and one non‐randomised cross‐over study) with approximately 62,389 participants. All studies were conducted in high‐income countries in large tertiary care hospitals. There was a high risk of performance bias in the controlled studies due to the nature of the interventions. None of the ITS studies had a control arm, so we could not be sure of the detected effects being independent of other changes. None of the studies reported on the number of false adverse drug event reports submitted. There is low‐certainty evidence suggesting that an education session, together with reminder card and adverse drug reaction (ADR) report form, may substantially improve the rate of ADR reporting by healthcare professionals when compared to usual practice (i.e. spontaneous reporting with or without some training provided by regional pharmacosurveillance units). These educational interventions increased the number of ADR reports in total (RR 3.00, 95% CI 1.53 to 5.90; 5 studies, 21,655 participants), serious ADR reports (RR 3.30, 95% CI 1.51 to 7.21; 5 studies, 21,655 participants), high‐causality ADR reports (RR 2.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 5.57; 5 studies, 21,655 participants), unexpected ADR reports (RR 4.72, 95% CI 1.75 to 12.76; 4 studies, 15,085 participants) and new drug‐related ADR reports (RR 8.68, 95% CI 3.40 to 22.13; 2 studies, 7884 participants). Additionally, low‐certainty evidence suggests that, compared to usual practice (i.e. spontaneous reporting), making it easier to report ADRs by using a standardised discharge form with added ADR items may slightly improve the total number of ADR reports submitted (RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.11 to 3.83; 1 study, 5967 participants). The discharge form tested was based on the 'Diagnosis Related Groups' (DRG) system for recording patient diagnoses, and the medical and surgical procedures received during their hospital stay. Due to very low‐certainty evidence, we do not know if the following interventions have any effect on the total number of adverse drug event reports (including both ADR and ME reports) submitted by healthcare professionals: ‐ sending informational letters or emails to GPs and nurses; ‐ multifaceted interventions, including financial and non‐financial incentives, fines, education and reminder cards; ‐ implementing government regulations together with financial incentives; ‐ including ADR report forms in quarterly bulletins and prescription pads; ‐ providing a hyperlink to the reporting form in hospitals' electronic patient records; ‐ improving the reporting method by re‐engineering a web‐based electronic error reporting system; ‐ the presence of a clinical pharmacist in a hospital setting actively identify -Abstract Truncated-

Detection and prevention of medication misadventures in general practice

Safe Medication Use Based on Knowledge of Information about Contraindications Concerning Cross Allergy and Comprehensive Clinical Intervention

Analysis of a Pharmacist-Led Adverse Drug Event Management Model for Pharmacovigilance in an Academic Medical Center Hospital in China

Medication adverse events in the ambulatory setting: A mixed-methods analysis

Analysis of the nature and contributory factors of medication safety incidents following hospital discharge using National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) data from England and Wales: a multi-method study

Paediatric medication incident reporting: a multicentre comparison study of medication errors identified at audit, detected by staff and reported to an incident system

Improving adverse drug event reporting by healthcare professionals

What Are Incident Reports Telling Us? A Comparative Study At Two Australian Hospitals Of Medication Errors Identified At Audit, Detected By Staff And Reported To An Incident System

Analysis of Spontaneously Reported Adverse Drug Events: Towards Developing Systems for Preventability

Adverse drug events and medication errors in Australia

Prevalence and potential clinical significance of near miss dispensing errors at a large teaching hospital in the United Kingdom (UK)

Patients' Identification, Management and Prevention of Adverse Drug Reactions: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Patients with Severe Adverse Drug Reactions

Underreporting of Adverse Drug Events: a Look into the Extent, Causes, and Potential Solutions

Exploring Susceptibility Factors to Medication Dispensing Errors Through a Retrospective Study of Patient-Reported Dispensing Errors over 11 Years: Are Dispensing Errors Indeed Due to Personal Reasons for Pharmacists?

Frequency, type and clinical importance of medication history errors at admission to hospital: a systematic review

"Doctor, would it surprise you if there were prescribing errors in this patient's medication?" Identifying eligible patients for in‐hospital pharmacotherapeutic stewardship: A matched case‐control study

Development, Testing, and Findings of a Pediatric-Focused Trigger Tool to Identify Medication-Related Harm in US Children's Hospitals

Patient and caregiver perspectives on causes and prevention of ambulatory adverse events: multilingual qualitative study

An Investigation of Pharmacovigilance and Reporting of Adverse Drug Reactions in Hospitals: a Cross-Sectional Study in China

Adverse Drug Events in Chinese Elder Inpatients: a Retrospective Review for Evaluating the Efficiency of the Global Trigger Tool.

Improving medication safety in primary care. A review and consensus procedure by the LINNEAUS collaboration on patient safety in primary care