DIFFERENT STANDARDS FOR REPORTING ADRS TO HERBAL REMEDIES AND CONVENTIONAL OTC MEDICINES - FACE-TO-FACE INTERVIEWS WITH 515 USERS OF HERBALREMEDIES

Aims To determine whether adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to herbal reme dies would be reported differently from similar ADRs to conventional o ver-the-counter (OTC) medicines by herbal-remedy users. Methods Face-t o-face interviews (using a structured questionnaire) with 515 users of herbal remedies were conducted in six pharmacy stores and six healthf ood stores in the UK. The questionnaire focused on the likely course o f action taken by herbal-remedy users after experiencing an ADR associ ated with a conventional OTC medicine and a herbal remedy. Results Fol lowing a 'serious' suspected ADR, 156 respondents (30.3%) would consul t their GP irrespective of whether the ADR was associated with the use of a herbal remedy or a conventional OTC medicine, whereas 221 respon dents (42.9%) would not consult their GP for a serious ADR associated with either type of preparation. One hundred and thirty-four responden ts (26.0%) would consult their GP for a serious ADR to a conventional OTC medicine, but not for a similar ADR to a herbal remedy, whereas fo ur respondents (0.8%) would consult their GP for a serious ADR to a he rbal remedy, but not for a similar ADR to a conventional OTC medicine. Similar differences were found in attitudes towards reporting 'minor' suspected ADRs. Conclusions Consumers of herbal remedies would act di fferently with regard to reporting an ADR (serious or minor) to their GP depending on whether it was associated with a herbal remedy or a co nventional OTC medicine. This has implications for herbal pharmacovigi lance, particularly given the increasing use of OTC herbal remedies. T he finding that a high proportion of respondents would not consult the ir GP or pharmacist following ADRs to conventional OTC medicines is al so of concern.