Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background:Materiovigilance is essential for monitoring medical device-associated adverse events and ensuring patient safety.Aim: To assess the knowledge, attitude, and practice of materiovigilance among faculty and postgraduate residents. Materials and Methods: A mixed-methods study was conducted over three months at a tertiary care hospital in Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh. A total of 210 faculty members and postgraduate residents from various departments were recruited using convenience sampling. Quantitative data were collected using a structured, selfadministered, English-language questionnaire comprising nine knowledge questions, nine attitude items, and five practice questions. Knowledge, attitude, and practice scores were analyzed descriptively using frequencies and percentages. Qualitative data were obtained through focused group discussions among participants with poor knowledge scores and analyzed thematically. Results: The overall knowledge, attitude, and practice scores were 72.6%, 93.6%, and 69.1%, respectively. All participants routinely checked device functionality, but only 48.1% had received formal reporting training. Key barriers included inadequate awareness, workload, limited reporting access, and fear of administrative consequences.Conclusion: Despite a highly positive attitude, gaps in knowledge and practice highlight the need for regular training, simplified reporting procedures, and institutional support to improve materiovigilance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rajanikanth et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: