Background: The introduction of pharmacovigilance (PV) program helps in very early detection of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) andidentification of risk factors and various measures to be taken once it happened. This study was aimed at investigating the knowledgeand attitude of doctors in a research institute about ADR reporting and suggesting possible ways of improving ADR reporting.Materials and Methods: This study was a cross‑sectional, questionnaire‑based survey conducted at a tertiary care leprosy hospital which is a research institute. The respondents were doctors and students visiting this institute. The study instrument was a self‑developed, prevalidated, semi‑structured questionnaire of 25 questions. Results: A total of 55 questionnaires were considered for analysis, giving a response rate of 100%. In all, 87.93% of the respondents were aware about pharmacovigilance, 68.96% were aware of ADR reporting system in India, 91.37% opined that only serious ADR with any medicine should be reported, and 4.3% believed that ADR should be reported only for newly marketed agents. Although 88.79% of the respondents observed an ADR, only 31.03% reported it; 60% were aware about the complete step to betaken after ADR. The general attitude of the respondents about ADR reporting was as follows: ADR reporting should be mandatory (60.34%),voluntary (29.31%), and need base (10.34%) and the preferred mode to report should be phone (34.48%), dropbox (22.41%), E‑mail (25.86%),and personal visit (8.6%). Nearly 77.58% of the respondents needed a complete feedback after the ADR reporting. Almost 51.72% of therespondents opted increasing awareness about PV through training/projects/continuing medical education, as the factor encouraging for ADR reporting, and 51.72% opted lack of knowledge about the process of reporting, as the factor discouraging ADR reporting. Conclusion: From the study, it was found that most of the doctors and students were unaware of the ADR reporting forms and their availability which should be sorted out in the institutional setting for better results.

Adverse drug reaction --- pharmacovigilance --- report

Background: Cutaneous drug reactions are the most common adverse reactions attributed to drugs. Any skin disorder can be imitated, induced or aggravated by drugs. Aims:The present study was carried out to determine the age, sex incidence and clinical pattern of drug eruptions, to recognize offending drugs (self medication or prescribed), to evaluate mortality and morbidity associated with drugs, to educate the patients, and to avoid self-administration of drugs and re-administration of the offending drugs. Methods: The diagnosis of cutaneous drug reactions is mainly based on detailed history and correlation between drug intake and the onset of rash. Two hundred patients (109 males and 91 females) present with cutaneous drug reactions were studied.Results: Fixed drug eruption was seen in 57 patients; other cases were; urticaria and angioedema in 34, morbilliform rash in 33, pruritus in 25, Stevens Johnson (SJ) syndrome in three, purpura in six, exfoliative dermatitis in five, photosensitivity in six, Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis in one, acneiform eruption in eleven, and erythema multiforme in seven patients. The most frequently affected age group was 41-50 years, followed by the 21-30 and 31-40 years age groups. The youngest patient was one year old and the oldest was 80 years old. The period of development of lesions after the intake of drug(s) varies from 01-45 days. Cotrimoxazole was the offending drug in 28 (14%) of cases, followed by Ibuprofen in 22 (11%) of cases. Conclusions:Fixed drug eruption was the most common drug eruption seen. Cotrimoxazole was the most common cause of drug eruptions.

Adverse drug reaction --- cutaneous drug reaction --- drug eruption