Abstract
Background Prescribers must possess extensive knowledge and maintain a positive attitude towards the rational use of medicines to achieve desirable treatment outcomes and effectively prevent treatment failures, increased costs, drug toxicities, and interactions. The objective of this study was to evaluate prescribers’ understanding and perception concerning the rational use of medicines in public hospitals. Additionally, the study aimed to identify the factors that influence rational prescribing practices.
Methods A structured data instrument was developed to collect demographic data and evaluate participants’ knowledge and perception of rational medicine use, in line with the study objectives. Chi-squared statistics and Fisher’s exact test were utilized to identify factors associated with good knowledge and perception among participants. Logistic regression was then employed to assess the strength of the associations, with odd ratios reported at a significant level of 0.05.
Results Out of 192 participants, 85.4% held a positive view of rational medicine use, stressing patient safety and recognizing risks like antimicrobial resistance and polypharmacy. Perception was influenced by factors such as prescriber profession, access to references, and drug bulletin updates. Additionally, 65.6% demonstrated good knowledge of rational medicine use, which was notably influenced by factors like using standard prescribing guidelines, having a functional Drug and Therapeutics Committee, prescriber profession, and the frequency of drug bulletin updates.
Conclusion The study emphasizes the critical need to address knowledge gaps among healthcare professionals, especially nurses and other prescribers, to ensure the safe and effective use of medications. It highlights the positive influence of utilizing preferred prescribing references and the existence of functional Drug and Therapeutics Committees in hospitals on knowledge levels. However, the unexpected findings regarding the limited impact of frequent updates of drug bulletins require further investigation.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Committee on Human Research, Publication and Ethics of Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology gave ethical approval for this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced are available online at https://data.mendeley.com/datasets/7jjd2t9gjm/2
