Background: AI platforms are equipped with advanced ‎algorithms that have the potential to offer a wide range of ‎applications in healthcare services. However, information about the accuracy of AI chatbots against ‎conventional drug-drug interaction tools is limited‎. This study aimed to assess the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, Bing AI, and Bard in predicting drug-drug interactions. Methods: AI-based chatbots (ie, ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, Microsoft Bing AI, and Google Bard) were compared for their abilities to detect clinically relevant DDIs for 255 drug pairs. Descriptive statistics, such as specificity, sensitivity, accuracy, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV), were calculated for each tool. Results: When a subscription tool was used as a reference, the specificity ranged from a low of 0.372 (ChatGPT-3.5) to a high of 0.769 (Microsoft Bing AI). Also, Microsoft Bing AI had the highest performance with an accuracy score of 0.788, with ChatGPT-3.5 having the lowest accuracy rate of 0.469. There was an overall improvement in performance for all the programs when the reference tool switched to a free DDI source, but still, ChatGPT-3.5 had the lowest specificity (0.392) and accuracy (0.525), and Microsoft Bing AI demonstrated the highest specificity (0.892) and accuracy (0.890). When assessing the consistency of accuracy across two different drug classes, ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 showed the highest ‎variability in accuracy. In addition, ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, and Bard exhibited the highest ‎fluctuations in specificity when analyzing two medications belonging to the same drug class. Conclusion: Bing AI had the highest accuracy and specificity, outperforming Google’s Bard, ChatGPT-3.5, and ChatGPT-4. The findings highlight the significant potential these AI tools hold in transforming patient care. While the current AI platforms evaluated are not without limitations, their ability to quickly analyze potentially significant interactions with good sensitivity suggests a promising step towards improved patient safety.

Background: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are a major cause of drug related morbidity and mortality. Pharmacovigilance is the science that plays an essential role in the reduction of ADRs, thus the evolution and growth of this science are critical for effective and safe clinical practice. Objectives: This study is considered the first study in the region to evaluate pharmacist’s knowledge, practice and attitudes toward ADRs reporting after establishing the national ADRs reporting center in Jordan. Method: A cross sectional study was used to evaluate pharmacist knowledge and attitude toward ADRs reporting. A structured validated questionnaire was developed for this purpose and a total of 208 pharmacists were recruited to participate in this study. Results: The majority of pharmacists have insufficient awareness and lack of knowledge about pharmacovigilance and ADRs reporting. Also the rate of reporting of ADRs was extremely poor. Several factors were found to discourage pharmacists from reporting ADRs, which include inadequate information available from the patient, unavailability of pharmacist ADRs form when needed, unawareness of the existence of the national ADRs reporting system. Also pharmacists think that ADRs are unimportant or they did not know how to report them. Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that pharmacists have insufficient knowledge about the concept of pharmacovigilance and spontaneous ADRs reporting. On the other hand, pharmacists had positive attitudes toward pharmacovigilance, despite their little experience with ADRs reporting. Educational programs are needed to increase pharmacist’s role in the reporting process, and thus to have a positive impact on the overall patient caring process.

Introduction: Understanding why adults resort to herbal medicine can help in planning interventions aimed at increasing awareness regarding herbal use. This study sought to investigate the prevalence and to determine factors for predicting the use of herbal medicine among Jordanian adults. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted involving 378 older adults who were randomly selected from two different areas of Jordan. A questionnaire was used to gather data and validation criteria for validity and reliability of the content were tested by content and face validity in a panel of experts. Results: From a total of 500 invited participants, 378 completed the questionnaire. The prevalence of the use of of herbal products in this study was high at 80.2%. Herbal medicines use was not associated with any demographic factors other than age (p < 0.05). Moreover, the only associated health-related characteristic was the patient’s disease state including, notably, hypertension (p < 0.05). Reasons for not using herbal medicines as reported by nonusers included mainly a lack of belief in their efficacy (52.2%). Another two important reasons were that the individuals believed themselves to healthy and have no need for their use (31.3%) and the unavailability of enough information about the herbal medicines (29.7%). Finally, the most common side effects as reported by patients in this study were nausea and vomiting (9.3%), and, to a lesser extent, skin rash (2.1%). Conclusion: There is a high rate of use of herbal medicines in Jordan, especially among hypertensive patients. Therefore, there is a need to establish effective herbal medicine policies and health education programs to discuss the benefits and risks of herbal medicine use, with the aim of maximizing patient-desired therapeutic outcomes.

Objectives: Health departments endeavor to give care to individuals to remain in healthy conditions. Medications errors (MEs), one of the most types of medical errors, could be venomous in clinical settings. Patients will be harmed physically and psychologically, in addition to adverse economic consequences. Reviewing and understanding the topic of medication error especially by nurses can help in advancing the medical services to patients.Methods: A search using search engines such as PubMed and Google scholar were used in finding articles related to the review topic.Key findings: This review highlighted the classifications of MEs, their types, outcomes, reporting process, and the strategies of error avoidance. This summary can bridge and open gates of awareness on how to deal with and prevent error occurrences. It highlights the importance of reporting strategies as mainstay prevention methods for medication errors.Conclusions: Medication errors are classified based on multifaceted criteria and there is a need to standardize the recommendations and make them a central goal all over the globe for the best practice. Nurses are the frontlines of clinical settings, encouraged to be one integrated body to prevent the occurrence of medication errors. Thus, systemizing the guidelines are required such as education and training, independent double checks, standardized procedures, follow the five rights, documentation, keep lines of communication open, inform patients of drug they receive, follow strict guidelines, improve labeling and package format, focus on the work environment, reduce workload, ways to avoid distraction, fix the faulty system, enhancing job security for nurses, create a cultural blame-free workspace, as well as hospital administration, should support and revise processes of error reporting, and spread the awareness of the importance of reporting.

Objective: Based on the theory on planned behavior, perception or attitude is found to be a well-established predictor of healthcare providers’ intentions to perform different behaviors. Also, improving knowledge was proposed to affect their practice as well. In Jordan, many studies have been conducted to evaluate healthcare providers’ knowledge and perception towards pharmacovigilance but no intervention or training was provided. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of an educational workshop on the knowledge and perception of healthcare providers towards pharmacovigilance in a Jordanian tertiary teaching hospital. Methods: An interventional study conducted in Jordan University Hospital on various healthcare providers to assess their pre- and post-knowledge and perception towards pharmacovigilance and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) reporting via questionnaire before and after an educational workshop. Results: Among the 200 invited healthcare providers, 150 attended the educational workshop (response rate 75.0%). Pre-workshop, healthcare providers showed an overall low knowledge score (7.8/19), where only 8.7% could define pharmacovigilance correctly. On the other hand, they showed a favorable perception score (33.6/39). Following educational workshop, knowledge scores significantly improved by 67.9% (P-value <0.05). A similar finding was obtained for perception scores, where perception scores significantly improved by 10.1% following workshop (P-value <0.05). Conclusion: Continuous efforts are needed to implement different strategies including education modules and the provision of appropriate training programs to increase awareness and improve perception towards pharmacovigilance among healthcare providers. Future study is needed to evaluate the impact of improving knowledge and perception on ADRs reporting practice.