Development of a Model for Monitoring, Handling and Warning Regarding Unsafe Health Products in Rattaphum District, Songkhla Province

Abstract

Objective: To develop and evaluate a model for monitoring, handling and warning of unsafe health products (UHPs) in Rattaphum District, Songkhla Province. Method: This study was two-cycle action research. The participants were the Working Group on Health Consumer Protection Development in 13 primary care units, totaling 327 people, including village health volunteers, community leaders, public health officers, teachers in the FDA Juniors project, and officials in local administrative organizations. The researcher provided feedback on the problems of UHPs in the area to the Working Group, and jointly determined the approach for UHP surveillance, management and warning. The finalized model was the WMA 1.1. W (watch) consists of 6 elements: 1. N (network) or network establishment; 2. E (education) or providing knowledge on the 6 prime questions; 3. P (practice) or applying the knowledge into practice by members of the network; 4 P (proactive surveillance activities) or organizing proactive surveillance activities; 5 F (flow report) or setting up the reporting process, and 6 P (pride) or creating pride in those who report the problems on UHPs. M (management) consists of 4 elements including C (consumer) or managing problems of UHP uses by consumers; 2. P (product) or managing UHPs; 3. F (flow manage) or setting up the management process, and P (proactive problem solving activities) or organizing proactive activities to resolve important problems in the area. A (Alert) is UHP warning. The model was evaluated according to the criteria set before and after the 4-month intervention. Results: After model implementation, average knowledge on UHPs surveillance among the working group increased significantly from 11.71±2.97 to 16.83±2.57 (from the total score of 20) (P<0.001). The reporting of UHPs was 100% correct. The surveillance and identification of UHPs increased from 15 to 95 cases. All problems of UHPs and UHP users were managed. The risk level of UHPs decreased from high to low. The numbers of role models in UHPs surveillance and warning increased from 21 to 41. The community health warning centers of primary care units passed the criteria with 3 at the improving level and 9 at the strong level. Conclusion: The WMA model 1.1 increased the Working Group's knowledge of UHPs surveillance. The surveillance, management and warning of UHPs were improved.