International Journal of Pharmacology and Clinical Sciences,2021,10,1,13-19.
Objectives: To discover the healthcare providers (physicians and dentists) practice of the adverse drug reaction reporting system in Saudi Arabia. Methods: It was a crosssectional study with a self-administered electronic authenticated survey distributed to Saudi Arabia physicians and dentists. The survey contained of demographic data and rudiments of practicing the ADR reporting system, the number of ADR reported, the method of ADR reporting systems. Results: The total number of participants was 151. Of those, 111 (73.5%) were physicians, while dentists were 39 (26.5%). Of those 52 (35.68%), only those who reported the ADR despite most responders 138 (92.62%) thought the ADR reporting system was critical. The average scores of physicians practice ADR elements were 2.59. The physicians and dentists’ responders had a high score of the agreement; ADR’s essential tasks as a pharmacist. Conclusion: Over the past twenty years, more than theory studies and our study specified that ADR physicians’ reporting was terrible. The switching accountability of ADR reporting from healthcare providers to the pharmacist is highly suggested.