The evaluation of adverse drug reactions in Saudi Arabia: A retrospective observational study.

Purpose: This study aimed to assess the type, severity, seriousness, reasons, and outcomes of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in the reports submitted to the regional spontaneous ADR database. Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted to analyze all the Tabuk Health Affairs hospitals in Saudi Arabia submitted to SFDA from January 2020 to December 2020. The database was structured according to the Saudi ADR form's fields. The Naranjo algorithm was used to assess the causes of the ADRs (sFDA, 2022). Results: For 1 year, 2,349 ADR reports, along with 242 suspected drugs for 4,114 reactions, were submitted to SFDA. We found more males than females had ADRs (56.1% vs. 43.8%, P < 0.05).Antimicrobial drugs (26.9%), hematologic drugs (19.7%), and neuropsychiatric drugs (12.9%) were responsible for most ADRs. Most of the reactions were associated with the use of ciprofloxacin (7.7%), followed by the combination of lopinavir and ritonavir (4.1%). Two deaths resulted from salbutamol and cefazolin use. Based on the results of the Naranjo assessment of causality, cardiovascular events (9.9%) exhibited the highest score (≥9) for a causal relationship with the suspected drugs, followed by dermatological events (9.5%). Conclusions: The spontaneous report database is an important and valuable source of aftermarket authorization safety information. In our study, most drugs used as antimicrobial, cardiovascular, and hematologic therapies were associated with a higher risk of developing severe and serious events. We recommend monitoring and using medications optimally to ensure patient safety.

A Ten-year Report of Drug and Poison Information Center in Mashhad, Iran 2007-2017.

The Mashhad drug and poison information center (MDPIC) was officially established in 2000 to provide up-to-date information on medications. The objective of this study is to provide an epidemiologic profile of drug inquiry and poisoning-related phone calls to MDPIC from 2007 to 2017. This article is a descriptive retrospective study in which all inquiries about drugs and poisoning cases received by MDPIC, from 1st January 2007 to 31st December 2017, were retrieved from its database for analysis. A total of 100997 cases were analyzed. The most frequent calls were from individuals in the age group of 18 to 60 years old (70.21%). The majority of callers were women (73.08%). The public made 95.11% of calls, and 4.89% were related to health care professionals. The queries were mainly related to therapeutic uses of drugs (24.03%), followed by adverse drug reactions (18.96%). Given that 99.23% of calls were related to drug information inquiries, the most common drugs questioned about were antimicrobial (12.3%) and vitamin and minerals (10.76%), whereas 0.77% of calls were about poisoning and the majority of them were due to drugs poisoning. Micromedex® was the most commonly used reference to answer the inquiries. This report shows an updated epidemiological evaluation on recorded calls in the drug and poison information center in Mashhad. Since there is no other similar report, this can provide valuable information on the trend of drug usage and may guide further strategies in giving proper information to public and health centers.

[Service rendered's assessment of a pharmaceutical information center on patients care]. / Évaluation du service rendu d'un centre d'information pharmaceutique sur la prise en charge des patients.

The Question-Answer (Q/R) service of Lyon's teaching hospital, offers reliable and updated information for healthcare professionals (HP). The impact of Q/R activity on patient outcome was measured by using a survey to assess user's satisfaction and impact on HP knowledge and/or patients cares. The compatibility of this tool with daily use had been assessed too. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The survey was sent prospectively, for 9 months in 2018, to all HP whose enquiry was linked to a particular patient's care. The survey was posted 24-48h after the answer had been provided. RESULTS: 41 survey over 55 sent were returned (74.5%). The level of satisfaction measured is mostly good or excellent on all evaluated items. The HP surveyed consider that the responses provided have a potential positive impact on their professional knowledge and practices (97.6%), on the patient's care (n=36/37) and patient outcome (n=22/23). CONCLUSION: High level of satisfaction with the Q/R service and positive impact of this specialized Q/R service on improvement of HP knowledge and patient's care. This tool can be used in daily practice.

Overview, Challenges and Future Prospects of Drug Information Services in Nepal: A Reflective Commentary.

Drug information center (DIC) or Medicine information services provides impartial, well-referenced, critically evaluated, updated information on various aspects of medications to healthcare professionals and consumers. Medicine information services also contribute to the minimization of medication errors by promoting medication education and supporting pharmaceutical services. The main objective of this reflective commentary is to highlight the recent scenario of medicine information services in Nepal, challenges for DIC, how DICs can be strengthened and future perspectives of DIC. The availability of medicine information in various online drug information sites and numerous applications (apps) have made it easier to assess the information in the country such as Nepal. However, the reliability and validity of such information should be considered before dissemination. DIC plays a crucial role in improving drug safety by aiding clinicians in safer use of medications and promoting adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting in Nepal. Financial support for operating the DIC efficiently is scarce in Nepal resulting in operational problems. The performance of the medicine information services in the country should be evaluated periodically to ensure the good quality of the service. Steps should be taken by the government, private hospitals and regulatory bodies to sustain the already established DIC and to establish additional DICs in the future to provide quality health care service to the community.

Survey of drug information centers in the United States-2018.

PURPOSE: To provide a current directory of drug information centers (DICs) in the United States and present information about their characteristics, activities and services, and networking activities. METHODS: In February 2018, an electronic 23-question survey was delivered to 118 contacts on a distribution list compiled from previous directories of DICs, responses to listserv messages, and an Internet search. DICs, defined as formal centers dedicated to providing drug information services, including but not limited to responding to drug information requests, were asked questions about their characteristics, activities and services, drug information requests, and networking activities. RESULTS: The response rate was 79% (93 of 118 DICs). Of the 93 respondents, 82 (88%) met the definition of a DIC and were included in the directory. Of the 82 included DICs, 37 (45%) belonged to a university or college, while 36 (44%) belonged to a medical center or hospital. Seventy percent of the DICs (n = 57) had been in existence for more than 20 years. Of the 81 respondents reporting activities performed at the DICs, precepting pharmacy students (n = 79, 98%) and training pharmacy residents and/or fellows (n = 68, 84%) were most commonly reported. Nearly 90% reported that answering drug information questions was central to the DIC operations. Most DICs (n = 52, 65%) indicated receiving an average of 50 requests or less on a monthly basis. DICs reported a variety of electronic means of communicating with the DIC community, although 16 (21%) of the 77 respondents reported no need to do so. CONCLUSION: The survey identified 82 DICs that collectively provide a variety of services to their clienteles. The DIC directory published herein should facilitate networking among DICs.

Decoding the Roadmap for Capacity Building of Pharmacology Academicians in Catering to Drug Information Center Services in a Developing Country.

Background: Very few medical institutions are currently providing drug information center (DIC) services in low-resource countries. Objective: To assess whether academician pharmacologists of India are prepared to deliver countrywide services with regard to DICs. Methods: A cross-sectional knowledge attitude and practice study was planned in the form of an online survey. A hyperlink to the questionnaire was sent to academician pharmacologists via email, Facebook, and WhatsApp. Determinants associated with pharmacologists' capacity and willingness in uplifting the DIC services were determined using logistic regression. Results: One hundred and thirteen academician pharmacologists responded. Participants who were working in limited functional DIC had 0.30 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.09-0.98) times association with answering that referring to promotional drug literature is an inappropriate practice for DIC services to that of nonfunctional DIC participants. However, the same had 5.28 (95% CI = 1.74-16.00) times association with referring to literature for establishing and running the services more as compared with participants with nonfunctional DIC. Participants from fully functional DICs in their departments had 6.31 (95% CI = 1.92-20.70) times association with identifying that adverse event reporting is not the function of DIC as compared with participants from a non-functional DIC. Participants with more academic experience had 6.7 (95% CI = 1.36 to 32.93) times association with an identification of challenges as compared with that of less experience participants. Conclusion: Academician pharmacologists need to be trained in critical appraisal of published literature and guided on how to establish and maintain the services for hospital clinicians. Senior pharmacology academicians' advice will be crucial in strengthening the roadmap for capacity building.

Naturalistic Evaluation of Pharmacotherapy Consultations Provided to Hospital Clinicians: A Developing Country's Perspective.

Background: Critical appraisal of published literature for hospital clinicians has never been taken as an initiative in developing countries. Objective: This study was aimed at evaluating the nature of pharmacotherapy consultations from the drug information center (DIC) of the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India. Methods: The DIC received pharmacotherapy consultation requests from January 2016 to December 2017. Various aspects such as clinical queries, patient-related factors, and disease-related information in these requests were recorded and analyzed. Descriptive statistics and χ2 test were used for the analysis of the data and feedback evaluation, respectively. Results: During the study, a total of 179 consultation requests were documented. On 19 (10.61%) encounters, pharmacotherapy consultations occurred for emergency patient care. Of the 179 queries, 31 (17.3%) were answered immediately while 148 (82.68%) were answered within an average time of 1.6 hours. The most common type of query was the pharmacotherapy of disease, followed by dose calculation and dose modification. Communications with DIC staff took place for timely critical appraisal of the medical literature, followed by a judicious selection of higher antimicrobials and other drugs. The time taken for answering a query was found to be a statistically significant determinant of user satisfaction (P < .05). Conclusion: The evidence level-specific drug information service was established and catered to hospital clinicians through critical evaluation of offline and online resources. DIC services have the potential to revolutionize the pharmacy and pharmacology curriculum in developing countries.

Survey of faculty workload and operational characteristics for academic drug information centers.

INTRODUCTION: A survey of drug information specialists from academic drug information centers in the United States was conducted to identify faculty workload, operational characteristics of the center, and contribution of those faculty and centers to pharmacy education. METHODS: A 32-item survey was administered to drug information specialists and pharmacy college/school deans. Faculty workload items included age, credentials, training, and responsibilities. Center operational items identified clients, number of requests, staffing structure, and funding source. Pharmacy education items included number and type of students training at the center as well as drug information's role in the curriculum. Participants were also asked to identify recent and anticipated changes as well as predict future challenges for academic drug information centers. RESULTS: The survey achieved a response rate of 81% from eligible institutions. The typical drug information specialist is between 31 and 50 years old, in a clinical track faculty position, and has an average of 13 years of drug information experience. Academic drug information centers are generally funded by the institution, open five days a week, and serve a variety of clients including the lay public. The average drug information specialist teaches one didactic course and is a preceptor for 17 advanced practice experience students, and 15 introductory practice experience students. CONCLUSIONS: Drug information specialists and centers play an important role in pharmacy education. Results of this survey could assist in the creation of benchmarks for academic drug information faculty and centers in terms of workload, resource allocation, and promotion.

Drug information center: challenges of the research process to answer enquiries in hospital pharmaceutical practices.

OBJECTIVE: To characterise information requests (IRs) from hospitals received by a drug information center (DIC-RS) according to the resolution of the inquiries. METHOD: The sample consisted of all requestors and their respective IRs registered in the DIC-RS database from January 2012 to December 2016. Request without information in the consulted literature (RWI) were categorised according to the institution of origin. IRs from hospitals were classified by the information source, topic and subtopic of the questions, and the number of drugs and the pharmacological or therapeutic group. RESULTS: A total of 2,500 IRs were analysed. Of those, 25% did not exhibit conclusive information in the consulted sources. RWI from hospitals represented 51% of all RWI, followed by those from community pharmacies (13%) and health centres (9%). Tertiary literature was the most commonly used source (73%) for IRs from hospitals. The greatest difficulties in finding information were related to off-label drug administration and indication issues (52% of RWI). The most common type of off-label use was related to changes in the original pharmaceutical form of the drug. Furthermore, 61% of RWI were directed at a specific drug, mostly systemic anti-infectives. CONCLUSION: We found that a quarter of the answers did not exhibit conclusive information in the consulted sources. Answers to IRs from the hospital environment exhibited the greatest extent of limited information, and off-label use was responsible for most cases.

Drug information centers: An overview to the concept / Centros de información de medicamentos. Una visión global del concepto

Drug Information Centers (DIC) have an important place in the health care process since they provide independent and updated information. A search was developed in Medline, Science Direct, Academic Search Complete, LILACS and Academic Google in order to know the state of the art of DIC around the world. Regarding to a timeline, the first European DIC was created in 1960 and studies that described local situation were identified in 1996 and 2001. Thereafter, in the United States the first DIC was created in 1962 and 3 studies that describe DIC characteristics and changes trough time were identified between 2003 and 2008. Moreover, DICs were created in Singapore in 1980 and in Venezuela in 1981. In India was created a DIC in 1997. Subsequently, the WHO performed workshops in 2006 in order to create new centers in this country. In Asia was conducted a study in 1996 that identified 4 DIC. Concerning Latin America were found studies that describe local DIC from Brazil (2001) and Costa Rica (2003). Also, the network of Latin American and Caribbean DICs (REDCIMLAC) was created in 2011. In all consulted studies the DICs features were described including type of questions, professionals and infrastructure among others. Some of these studies included a comparison with the WHO technical document.

Los Centros de Información de Medicamentos (CIM) ocupan un lugar importante en el proceso de atención en salud al proporcionar información independiente y actualizada. Con el fin de conocer el estado del arte de los CIMs alrededor del mundo, se desarrolló una búsqueda en las bases de datos Medline, Science Direct, Academic Search Complete, LILACS y en Google Académico. Revisando cronológicamente la creación de CIMs, se encontró que el primero fue fundado en Europa en 1960. Posteriormente, se crearon en Estados Unidos en 1962, Singapur, 1980 y Venezuela, 1981. En India se fundó un CIM en 1997, posteriormente la OMS dictó talleres en ese país para fortalecer la creación de nuevos CIMs en 2006. En Asia se realizó un estudio en 1996 que identificó cuatro CIMs. En cuanto a Latinoamérica, se encontraron estudios de Brasil (2001) y Costa Rica (2003) que describen los CIMs locales. Adicionalmente, en 2011, se creó la red de CIMs de Latinoamérica y el Caribe (REDCIMLAC). En todos los estudios consultados se identificaron características de funcionamiento de los CIMs, como infraestructura, tipo de consultas, personal, entre otras. Algunos de estos estudios incluyeron una comparación con el documento técnico de la OMS.

Evaluación de los recursos de información en el Centro de Estudio, Documentación e Información de Medicamentos, Villa Clara / Assessment of information resources in the Center of Study, Documentation and Drug Information in Villa Clara province

Objetivo: evaluar los recursos de información disponibles en el Centro de Estudio, Documentación e Información de Medicamentos (CEDIMED). Métodos: se identificaron aquellas fuentes, servicios y sistemas que pudieran llegar a alcanzar la categoría de entidad o recurso de información dentro del CEDIMED, empleando la metodología INFOMAP. Se recolectaron datos sobre el costo de los recursos identificados y se desarrolló un ordenamiento de estos según su característica. Se determinó el índice de valor para cada ERIs y se elaboraron las matrices de usuario, gerente y suministradores, lo que posibilitó conocer el rol de cada miembro de la organización con respecto a los recursos de información. Se analizó la variable fondos de información, en la que se estudiaron un total de 15 indicadores. Resultados: se identificaron 47 entidades o recursos de información disponibles en el centro; de estas 36 internas y 11 externas. Los fondos documentales con los que cuenta el CEDIMED no presentaron un alto grado de actualización; sin embargo, las temáticas contenidas en estos, resultaron altamente pertinentes a las funciones de este tipo de organización. Alrededor de la mitad de los indicadores analizados fue evaluado de excelente; sin embargo, la variable fondos de información fue regular. Conclusiones: todo centro o servicio de información sobre medicamentos debe contar con recursos de información de calidad y fácil acceso por los usuarios; así como establecer una política para el desarrollo de los fondos y la realización de estudios sobre el uso de las diversas colecciones disponibles en la institución(AU)

Objective: to evaluate the information resources available at the Center of Study, Documentation and Information on Drugs (CEDIMED). Methods: identification of those sources, services and systems that might attain the category of entity or of information resource within CEDIMED by using the INFOMAD methodology. Data on the cost of identified resources were collected and ordered according to their characteristics. The value index was determined for each ERI and the user, manager and supplier matrices were prepared, all of which made it possible to know the role of each member of the organization in relation to the information resources. The variable called information stocks was analyzed including the study of 15 indicators. Results: forty seven information entities or resources were available at the center, 36 domestic and 11 external. The documentary stocks of CEDIMED were not highly updated; however, their topics were highly relevant for the functions of this type of organization. The evaluation of almost half of the analyzed indicators was excellent but the variable information stocks were rated as regular. Conclusions: every information center or service on drugs should have quality easy-to-access resources for users and should also set a policy aimed at developing the stocks and at carrying out studies on the use of the various collections located in the institution(AU)

Evaluación de los recursos de información en el Centro de Estudio, Documentación e Información de Medicamentos, Villa Clara / Assessment of information resources in the Center of Study, Documentation and Drug Information in Villa Clara province

OBJETIVO: evaluar los recursos de información disponibles en el Centro de Estudio, Documentación e Información de Medicamentos (CEDIMED). MÉTODOS: se identificaron aquellas fuentes, servicios y sistemas que pudieran llegar a alcanzar la categoría de entidad o recurso de información dentro del CEDIMED, empleando la metodología INFOMAP. Se recolectaron datos sobre el costo de los recursos identificados y se desarrolló un ordenamiento de estos según su característica. Se determinó el índice de valor para cada ERIs y se elaboraron las matrices de usuario, gerente y suministradores, lo que posibilitó conocer el rol de cada miembro de la organización con respecto a los recursos de información. Se analizó la variable fondos de información, en la que se estudiaron un total de 15 indicadores. RESULTADOS: se identificaron 47 entidades o recursos de información disponibles en el centro; de estas 36 internas y 11 externas. Los fondos documentales con los que cuenta el CEDIMED no presentaron un alto grado de actualización; sin embargo, las temáticas contenidas en estos, resultaron altamente pertinentes a las funciones de este tipo de organización. Alrededor de la mitad de los indicadores analizados fue evaluado de excelente; sin embargo, la variable fondos de información fue regular. CONCLUSIONES: todo centro o servicio de información sobre medicamentos debe contar con recursos de información de calidad y fácil acceso por los usuarios; así como establecer una política para el desarrollo de los fondos y la realización de estudios sobre el uso de las diversas colecciones disponibles en la institución(AU)

OBJECTIVE: to evaluate the information resources available at the Center of Study, Documentation and Information on Drugs (CEDIMED). METHODS: identification of those sources, services and systems that might attain the category of entity or of information resource within CEDIMED by using the INFOMAD methodology. Data on the cost of identified resources were collected and ordered according to their characteristics. The value index was determined for each ERI and the user, manager and supplier matrices were prepared, all of which made it possible to know the role of each member of the organization in relation to the information resources. The variable called information stocks was analyzed including the study of 15 indicators. RESULTS: forty seven information entities or resources were available at the center, 36 domestic and 11 external. The documentary stocks of CEDIMED were not highly updated; however, their topics were highly relevant for the functions of this type of organization. The evaluation of almost half of the analyzed indicators was excellent but the variable information stocks were rated as regular. CONCLUSIONS: every information center or service on drugs should have quality easy-to-access resources for users and should also set a policy aimed at developing the stocks and at carrying out studies on the use of the various collections located in the institution(AU)

Utilization of Recently Established Drug Information Centers Located in the Public Hospitals of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: An Assessment.

A drug information center is a unit designed for receiving, collecting, analyzing, and providing unbiased, accurate, and up-to-date information about drugs and their use. The drug information centers located in 4 public hospitals of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, were assessed in this study. They received a total of 467 drug information queries during their functional period until the time of this study. Among these queries, only 409 were eligible to be included in the analysis. The majority of the queries were from public hospitals (69%), mostly from health care professionals (94.9%), out of which physicians were the highest (49.7%), followed by pharmacists (32.8%). The study found that the most frequently encountered requests were related to therapeutic use (17.3%), followed by general product information and product availability; the highest number of queries concerned the use of anti-infectives (29%).

Indian aspects of drug information resources and impact of drug information centre on community.

Drug information centre refer to facility specially set aside for, and specializing in the provision of drug information and related issues. The purpose of drug information center is to provide authentic individualized, accurate, relevant and unbiased drug information to the consumers and healthcare professionals regarding medication related inquiries to the nation for health care and drug safety aspects by answering their call regarding the all critical problems on drug information, their uses and their side effects. Apart from that the center also provides in-depth, impartial source of crucial drug information to meet the needs of the practicing physicians, pharmacists and other health care professionals to safeguard the health, financial and legal interests of the patient and to broaden the pharmacist role visible in the society and community. The service should include collecting, reviewing, evaluating, indexing and distributing information on drugs to health workers. Drug and poisons information centers are best established within major teaching hospitals. This allows access to clinical experience, libraries, research facilities and educational activities. Information present in the current paper will not only enlighten the role of drug information center but also focused on the rational use of drug.

Perfil das interações medicamentosas solicitadas ao centro de informações sobre medicamentos de hospital universitário / Profile of information about drug interactions requested from the drug information center of a university hospital

Introdução: o Centro de Informações sobre Medicamentos (CIM) busca, através de suas fontes de pesquisa, identificar as possíveis interações medicamentosas que possam prejudicar ou não o paciente no momento da administração. Objetivo: descrever as interações medicamentosas identificadas pelo CIM, a partir de solicitações dos profissionais internos de hospital universitário. Método: foi realizado estudo descritivo, no período de janeiro de 2009 a maio de 2011, das solicitações relacionadas com interações medicamento x medicamento, medicamento x alimentos e sondas enterais e incompatibilidades medicamentosas. Das solicitações, verificou-se a disponibilidade de informação na literatura e a orientação fornecida ao solicitante. Resultados: das solicitações de interações medicamentosas, envolvendo 55 medicamentos, foram informadas 19 interações, na sua maioria moderadas (61%) e de efeito tardio (50%). Das interações medicamento x alimentos (N=15), 26,7% apresentaram efeitos de alteração na farmacocinética dos medicamentos. Para interações envolvendo medicamentos e dietas enterais, 58,3% dos fármacos não apresentavam interação, 25% não foram testados com dietas enterais e 16,7% foram considerados contraindicados. Em relação às incompatibilidades medicamentosas, dos medicamentos solicitados, 52,8% foram compatíveis e 16,1%, incompatíveis. Conclusão: o CIM vem auxiliando na resolução de dúvidas, mas a indisponibilidade de informações na literatura nem sempre permite uma prática segura e correta no momento da administração dos medicamentos.

Introduction: based on research of the literature, the Drug Information Center is aimed at identifying possible drug interactions that may harm patients. Aim: to describe the profile of drug interactions identified by the Drug Information Centre according to the information requested by the staff of a university hospital. Method: a descriptive study was conducted from January 2009 to May 2011. We reviewed the requests related to interactions of drug vs. drug, drug vs. food, and enteral tube and drug incompatibilities. In relation to the information requests, we also investigated the availability of information in the literature and the instructions provided to the requester. Results: among the requests involving 55 drugs, there were 19 drug interactions. Most of them were moderate (61%) and had late effect (50%). Among the drug vs. food interactions (n=15), 26.7% showed changes in the pharmacokinetics of drugs. In terms of interactions involving drugs and enteral feeding, 58.3% of the drugs did not show any interactions, 25% were not tested with enteral feeding, and 16.7% were considered contraindicated. With regard to drug incompatibility, 52.8% of the requests were compatible and 16.1% were incompatible. Conclusion: the Drug Information Center has been useful to assist in the resolution of doubts, but the unavailability of information in the literature not always enables a correct and safe practice of drug administration.

Caracterização das atividades desenvolvidas pelo Centro de Informações sobre Medicamentos do Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (CIM-HCPA): período de 2007 a 2010 / Description of the activities developed by the Drug Information Center of Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (DIC-HCPA): from 2007 to 2010

Objetivo: descrever as atividades do Centro de Informações sobre Medicamentos do Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (CIM-HCPA), no período de 2007 a 2010. Resultados: a média de solicitações passivas, no período, foi de 1160/ano e de informação ativa, de 160/ano. O programa de Farmacovigilância recebeu 1340 notificações de reações adversas a medicamentos e 155 notificações de produtos com problemas. A literatura disponível é atualizada e compatível conforme as recomendações. Na pesquisa de satisfação, 43% dos usuários classificaram o trabalho como ótimo. Conclusão: o CIM-HCPA vem cumprindo seus objetivos, fornecendo informação objetiva, atualizada e oportuna sobre medicamentos para os profissionais da instituição

Aim: to describe the activities of the Drug Information Center of Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (DIC-HCPA) from 2007 to 2010. Results: the mean of passive requests was 1160/year and of active information was 160/year. The Pharmacovigilance Program received 1340 notifications of adverse drug reactions and 155 notifications of products with problems. The bibliographic resources are updated and in agreement with recommendations. The results of a satisfaction survey indicated that 43% of the users classified the activities as excellent. Conclusion: the DIC-HCPA has been meeting its aim of providing objective, updated and timely information on drugs to professionals from the institution

Centro de informações sobre medicamentos: avaliação das informações passivas em hospital universitário no sul do Brasil / Drug information center: survey of passive information in university hospital in southern Brazil

Objetivo: O objetivo deste trabalho foi descrever as atividades passivas realizadas por um Centro de Informações sobre Medicamentos (CIM) de hospital universitário no sul do Brasil. Resultados: de 2002 a 2008, o total de solicitações recebidas foi de 8035, das quais 30,3% foram realizadas por enfermeiros, 24,3% por farmacêuticos e 15% por técnicos de enfermagem. O tempo gasto para a resposta foi em 56,8% das vezes de até 10 minutos. Os temas mais solicitados foram administração de medicamentos (25,6%), identificação do produto (16,4%), posologia (10,6%) e estabilidade (9,6%). Conclusão: O CIM é uma estratégia na busca pelo uso seguro e racional de medicamentos nos hospitais.

Aim: The aim of this study was to describe the passive activities of Drug Information Center (DIC) of a university hospital in southern Brazil. Results: From 2002 to 2008, the total of requests was 8035, of which 30.3% were answered by nurses, 24.3% pharmacists and 15% technical nursing. The time spent to response was less than 10 minutes in 56.8%. The principal requests were about drug administration (25.6%), identification of the product (16.4%), dosage (10.6%) and stability (9.6%). Conclusion: The DIC is a strategy in the search for safe and rational use of drugs in hospitals.