How (not) to inform patients about drug use: use and effects of negations in Dutch patient information leaflets

Coding linguistic elements in clinical interactions: a step-by-step guide for analyzing communication form

BACKGROUND

The quality of communication between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients affects health outcomes. Different coding systems have been developed to unravel the interaction. Most schemes consist of predefined categories that quantify the content of communication (the what). Though the form (the how) of the interaction is equally important, protocols that systematically code variations in form are lacking. Patterns of form and how they may differ between groups therefore remain unnoticed. To fill this gap, we present CLECI, Coding Linguistic Elements in Clinical Interactions, a protocol for the development of a quantitative codebook analyzing communication form in medical interactions.

METHODS

Analyzing with a CLECI codebook is a four-step process, i.e. preparation, codebook development, (double-)coding, and analysis and report. Core activities within these phases are research question formulation, data collection, selection of utterances, iterative deductive and inductive category refinement, reliability testing, coding, analysis, and reporting.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

We present step-by-step instructions for a CLECI analysis and illustrate this process in a case study. We highlight theoretical and practical issues as well as the iterative codebook development which combines theory-based and data-driven coding. Theory-based codes assess how relevant linguistic elements occur in natural interactions, whereas codes derived from the data accommodate linguistic elements to real-life interactions and contribute to theory-building. This combined approach increases research validity, enhances theory, and adjusts to fit naturally occurring data. CLECI will facilitate the study of communication form in clinical interactions and other institutional settings.

Replacing vaccine paper package inserts: a multi-country questionnaire study on the acceptability of an electronic replacement in different target groups

Background

In the European Union it is mandatory to include paper package leaflets (PPL) with all medicines, including vaccines, to inform the recipient. However, it is difficult to meet the necessity for localized PPLs in each of the 24 official European languages. Replacing PPLs with electronic versions offers many advantages including redistribution across nations, reduced storage space, accessibility by the visually impaired, easily updated information or the addition of video content. We wanted to assess the attitudes of patients (vaccine recipients or their parents) to the potential of replacing PPL with electronic versions.

Methods

We surveyed vaccinees or their parents in four European countries—Belgium, Italy, Bulgaria and France—for their actual use of vaccine PPLs and their opinions about switching to an electronic package leaflet. Our survey was conducted online because of the COVID-19 pandemic and resulted in 2518 responses to a questionnaire targeted at three specific groups with particular information needs: parents of young children, pregnant women and the elderly (≥ 60 years).

Results

Our main findings are that currently vaccine PPLs are rarely used and frequently unavailable for the vaccinee. Across the four countries surveyed 55–82% of vaccinees would accept an electronic version, as did 64% when there was an option to request a printout of the leaflet.

Conclusions

We found that switching to electronic versions of vaccine PPLs is an acceptable alternative for the public, potentially increasing the quality and amount of information reaching vaccinees while eliminating some barriers to redistribution of vaccines between countries.

Factors that Facilitate and Hinder the Comprehension of Patient Information Leaflets (PILs): A Brief Scoping Review

Introduction: Patient information leaflets (PILs) of medicinal products are informative documents that accompany medicines and explain their components, modes of use, interactions with other medicines, and other relevant issues. When patients do not adequately understand the information in the leaflets, they may engage in behaviors that affect their health (e.g., self-medication). Objective: To identify patient-related factors and characteristics of PILs that can promote cognitive, emotional, and behavioral changes that lead to appropriate drug use practices. Additionally, we aimed to determine strategies that could be implemented to design leaflets that convey adequate information and are easier to understand. Method and Results: We evaluated scientific articles published in databases and containing information on PILs suitability to be used in a patient population. A total of 51 articles were selected as the sample. Certain leaflet factors that favored or hindered understanding were identified (e.g., format in which the leaflets are presented, their structure, their adaptation to the sociodemographic and linguistic characteristics of the population, their wording…). Similarly, we also identified patient factors, such as previous experience taking the drugs referred to in the leaflet; the type of emotions experienced when reading the leaflets; the emphasis on the adverse effects of the medications; sociodemographic variables (i.e., age or educational level); and degree of interest in their own healthcare. Conclusion: Patient and leaflet factors influence the comprehension of information in the PIL; hence, emphasis should be placed on these factors to increase treatment and medication adherence and to reduce health-risk behaviors.

Comparison of the Knowledge and Practices in Medicine Dispensing between Retail Medicine Shops and Model Pharmacies in Dhaka Metropolis

Model pharmacy has been adopted recently to upgrade the healthcare delivery system in Bangladesh. This study was aimed to analyze and compare the effectiveness of drug dispensing patterns, practices, and knowledge of both clients and dispensers of model pharmacies over traditional retail medicine shops. Two established methods, namely, client simulated method (CSM) and provider interview method (PIM), were employed to determine the practice differences in 90 retail medicine shops and 90 model pharmacies in and around Dhaka city. The results are represented primarily in comparison with corresponding percentages. The survey results did not fully support the findings obtained from the observations of the CSM as PIM contrasted these to some extent, and the differences are statistically significant ( $p<0.0001$ ). According to CSM, the presence of A-grade pharmacists during working hours in retail medicine shops was 0%, and 63% in model pharmacies. As reported by PIM, in the retail medicine shops, 36% of clients were ignorant of visiting doctors before purchasing medicine. On the other hand, only 18% of clients could visit doctors. As per CSM, 40% of clients did not follow doctors' recommendations for completion of the full dose of antibiotics bought from retail medicine shops and 51% did not finish full antibiotic courses collected from model pharmacies. Additionally, CSM revealed that 28% of the clients administered leftover drugs following old and obsolete prescriptions of retail medicine shops and 21% of clients followed the same practices in terms of model pharmacies. The report of CSM revealed that 95% of dispensers of retail medicine shops sold medicine without prescription except over-the-counter (OTC), and in the model pharmacies, the percentage was 77%. The qualitative findings revealed substandard practices and dispensing pattern too. Model pharmacies were established to prevent aberrant medicine dispensing patterns and ensure proper medication dispensing practices and medicine intake. This research could not verify the situation that pharmacists or owners of model pharmacies were fully abiding by the guidelines set for them by the Directorate General of Drug Administration (DGDA).

Verbal Descriptions Accompanying Numeric Information About the Risk: The Valence of Message and Linguistic Polarity

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of presenting risk on decision making and evaluations with regard to the valence (positive vs. negative) and the linguistic polarity (direct vs. indirect). Participants were presented with a message in which patients were informed about risk associated with some diagnostic medical procedures. In the presented text, before obtaining statistical information about risk (e.g., 1 in 1000), four types of the verbal descriptions were used (risk is high/risk is not low/risk is low/risk is not high). The valence of information influenced the decision and respondent's evaluation. Participants receiving a verbal description with a positive valence were more positive about the patient' decision, and more positively evaluated the doctor and patient's mood than participants receiving a description with a negative valence. Neither main nor interaction effects with linguistic polarity were found. The research does not support that indirect wording mitigates the meaning of a message on risk and highlights the strength and persistence of relying on the verbal description, particularly their affective valence.

Readability assessment of package leaflets of biosimilars

OBJECTIVES

To assess the degree of readability and the length of the package leaflets of biosimilars.

SETTING

The package leaflets analysed were downloaded from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) website.

PARTICIPANTS

The study sample included the package leaflets written in English of all the biosimilars that were authorised by the EMA on 31 August 2017, and whose content was available via the internet on that date (n=35).

DESIGN

This was a cross-sectional analytical study. The readability of the package leaflets of all biosimilars authorised by the EMA in August 2017 was determined applying the Flesch and Flesch-Kincaid formulas. The influence of the following variables on the readability and length was also analysed: package leaflet section, type of biosimilar, date of first authorisation of the biosimilar and type of medicine.

RESULTS

A considerable variation of the package leaflets length was found (3154±803). The readability of all the package leaflets overtook the recommended value for health-related written materials taking into account Flesch-Kincaid Index, and none of the package leaflets were easy to understand according to the Flesch Index. Statistically significant differences (p<0.05) were observed between the sections of package leaflets in readability indices and length. The most difficult sections to understand were those related with the therapeutic indication of medicine and the possible side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Package leaflets for authorised biosimilars may not fulfil the function for which they were designed. The competent organisations could be informed about the possible negative effect on the use of this type of medicines.

Using Lexical Chains to Identify Text Difficulty: A Corpus Statistics and Classification Study

Our goal is data-driven discovery of features for text simplification. In this paper, we investigate three types of lexical chains: exact, synonymous, and semantic. A lexical chain links semantically related words in a document. We examine their potential with a document-level corpus statistics study (914 texts) to estimate their overall capacity to differentiate between easy and difficult text and a classification task (11 000 sentences) to determine usefulness of features at sentence-level for simplification. For the corpus statistics study we tested five document-level features for each chain type: total number of chains, average chain length, average chain span, number of crossing chains, and the number of chains longer than half the document length. We found significant differences between easy and difficult text for average chain length and the average number of cross chains. For the sentence classification study, we compared the lexical chain features to standard bag-of-words features on a range of classifiers: logistic regression, naïve Bayes, decision trees, linear and RBF kernel SVM, and random forest. The lexical chain features performed significantly better than the bag-of-words baseline across all classifiers with the best classifier achieving an accuracy of ∼90% (compared to 78% for bag-of-words). Overall, we find several lexical chain features provide specific information useful for identifying difficult sentences of text, beyond what is available from standard lexical features.

Alternative package leaflets improve people's understanding of drug side effects-A randomized controlled exploratory survey

Background

Current German and EU package leaflets (PLs) do not distinguish to what extent listed side effects are indeed side effects caused by drug intake or instead symptoms that occur regardless of drug use. We recently showed that most health professionals misinterpret the frequencies of listed side effects as solely caused by the drug. The present study investigated whether (1) these misinterpretations also prevail among laypeople and (2) alternative PLs reduce these misinterpretations.

Methods

In March 2017, 397 out of 400 laypeople approached completed an online survey. They were randomized to one of four PL formats: three alternative PLs (drug facts box with/without reading instruction, narrative format with numbers) and one standard PL. Each PL listed four side effects for a fictitious drug: two were presented as occurring more often, one as equally often, and one as less often with drug intake. The alternative formats (interventions) included information on frequencies with and without drug intake and included a statement on the causal relation. The standard PL (control) only included information on frequency ranges with drug intake. Questions were asked on general occurrence and causality of side effects.

Results

Participants randomized to the standard PL were unable to answer questions on causality. For side effects occurring more often (equally; less often) with drug intake, only 1.9% to 2.8% (equally: 1.9%; less often: 1.9%) provided correct responses about the causal nature of side effects, compared to 55.0% to 81.9% (equally: 23.8% to 70.5%; less often: 21.0% to 43.2%) of participants who received alternative PLs. It remains unclear whether one alternative format is superior to the others.

Conclusion

In conclusion, information on the frequency of side effects in current package leaflets is misleading. Comparative presentation of frequencies for side effects with and without drug intake including statements on the causal relation significantly improves understanding.

Quantifying positive communication: Doctor's language and patient anxiety in primary care consultations

OBJECTIVE

Positive communication is advocated for physicians during consultations with patients presenting medically unexplained symptoms (MUS), but studies generally focus on what is said rather than how it is said. This study quantified language use differences of general practitioners (GPs), and assessed their relation to patient anxiety.

METHODS

Language use of 18 Dutch GPs during 82 consultations was compared for patients with MUS versus medically explained symptoms (MES). Message content (positive or negative) was differentiated from its directness (direct or indirect), and related to changes in patient's state anxiety (abbreviated State Trait Anxiety Inventory; STAI).

RESULTS

In total, 2590 clauses were identified. GPs approached patients with MES with relatively more direct (vs. indirect) positive and indirect (vs. direct) negative messages (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.42-2.59). Anxiety of both patient groups increased when GPs used more direct (vs. indirect) negative messages (b = 0.67, 95% CI 0.07-1.27) CONCLUSIONS: GPs use different language depending on the content of messages for patients with MES, but not MUS. Direct negative messages relate to an increase in patient anxiety.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

GPs could manage patient's state anxiety by expressing negative messages in an indirect rather than direct manner.

Potential negative impact of informing patients about medication side effects: a systematic review

Background Pharmacovigilance, as it is carried out primarily by healthcare professionals is more focused on being very objective in nature. Acknowledging the importance of the subjective experience of patients in pharmacovigilance was underpinned by its unique ability to bring about a more holistic understanding through the deep information unraveled by the patients. Medication safety-related information has to be shared with patients to allow them to be actively involved in their therapy and pharmacovigilance. Despite the advantages of sharing information, it stands to reasons whether sharing information related to possible side effects would negatively affect patients and impinge upon their treatment plan and process. Aim of the Review The purpose of this systematic review was to critically assess the potential negative impact of informing patients about medication side effects by written and/or oral information on medication compliance, occurrence/development of suspected side effects and clinical outcomes. Method A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, and Cochrane library to identify potential records between the year 1975 and 2017; then titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened using the inclusion criteria to filter out irrelevant studies. The data extraction, and the results were narratively synthesized and presented in tables. Results A total of 2012 articles were screened for inclusion, 32 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and finally resulting in the inclusion of 17 randomized control studies which met the set criteria. Findings unraveled that the educational intervention did not result in increased occurrence/reporting of side effects in most of the evaluated studies; except 4 studies, and no significant impact on compliance to medications and negative clinical outcome was observed. Apprehension of negative events to medications were observed in two of the four studies which evaluated these parameters. Conclusion The present review did not find enough evidence to support the over concerns on the potential negative impact of sharing of information on the adverse effects to patients, though the influence could manifest as nocebo-effect. The various components and methods employed for this information sharing process can influence the potential impact of this activity. These concerns about the undesirable effects should not deter the active involvement of patients in pharmacovigilance activities. There is a definite need to have more studies in this area, where much of concern still does exist among the various stakeholders of drug safety information.

NegAIT: A new parser for medical text simplification using morphological, sentential and double negation

Many different text features influence text readability and content comprehension. Negation is commonly suggested as one such feature, but few general-purpose tools exist to discover negation and studies of the impact of negation on text readability are rare. In this paper, we introduce a new negation parser (NegAIT) for detecting morphological, sentential, and double negation. We evaluated the parser using a human annotated gold standard containing 500 Wikipedia sentences and achieved 95%, 89% and 67% precision with 100%, 80%, and 67% recall, respectively. We also investigate two applications of this new negation parser. First, we performed a corpus statistics study to demonstrate different negation usage in easy and difficult text. Negation usage was compared in six corpora: patient blogs (4K sentences), Cochrane reviews (91K sentences), PubMed abstracts (20K sentences), clinical trial texts (48K sentences), and English and Simple English Wikipedia articles for different medical topics (60K and 6K sentences). The most difficult text contained the least negation. However, when comparing negation types, difficult texts (i.e., Cochrane, PubMed, English Wikipedia and clinical trials) contained significantly (p<0.01) more morphological negations. Second, we conducted a predictive analytics study to show the importance of negation in distinguishing between easy and difficulty text. Five binary classifiers (Naïve Bayes, SVM, decision tree, logistic regression and linear regression) were trained using only negation information. All classifiers achieved better performance than the majority baseline. The Naïve Bayes' classifier achieved the highest accuracy at 77% (9% higher than the majority baseline).

[Compliance and leaflet's reading, which link and which media? Results from a French population with chronic kidney disease]

Leaflets inside drug boxes are complex and often poorly understood. Patients consulting in nephrology are mostly old and often suffer from multiple comorbidities. As so, they are often subject to various contra-indications and drug interactions. This paper aims to evaluate if patients actually read leaflets or other medical information on others medias such as Internet and whether this could, potentially, interfere with their observance. Results showed that leaflets were read by 65.1% of patients, leading to 12% of withdrawal or not taking drugs. Furthermore, compliance to medical guidance was deemed e-read by 65.1% of patients, leading to 12% of withdrawal or not taken drugs. Furthermore, this study showed no clear profile for non-compliant patients. Even the youngest patients (under 50 years old) have had a good compliance, with not more withdrawal or not taking pills. Nonetheless, youngest patients used more often to consult alternative medias and did not read much of the leaflets' information. Patients who were reading leaflets however, tended to search further information on other medias. This situation would create new challenges in health care, as it seems that data available on new medias are not systematically validated or adapted to the needs of the patients.

Readability Analysis of the Package Leaflets for Biological Medicines Available on the Internet Between 2007 and 2013: An Analytical Longitudinal Study

Background

The package leaflet included in the packaging of all medicinal products plays an important role in the transmission of medicine-related information to patients. Therefore, in 2009, the European Commission published readability guidelines to try to ensure that the information contained in the package leaflet is understood by patients.

Objective

The main objective of this study was to calculate and compare the readability levels and length (number of words) of the package leaflets for biological medicines in 2007, 2010, and 2013.

Methods

The sample of this study included 36 biological medicine package leaflets that were downloaded from the European Medicines Agency website in three different years: 2007, 2010, and 2013. The readability of the selected package leaflets was obtained using the following readability formulas: SMOG grade, Flesch-Kincaid grade level, and Szigriszt’s perspicuity index. The length (number of words) of the package leaflets was also measured. Afterwards, the relationship between these quantitative variables (three readability indexes and length) and categorical (or qualitative) variables were analyzed. The categorical variables were the year when the package leaflet was downloaded, the package leaflet section, type of medicine, year of authorization of biological medicine, and marketing authorization holder.

Results

The readability values of all the package leaflets exceeded the sixth-grade reading level, which is the recommended value for health-related written materials. No statistically significant differences were found between the three years of study in the readability indexes, although differences were observed in the case of the length (P=.002), which increased over the study period. When the relationship between readability indexes and length and the other variables was analyzed, statistically significant differences were found between package leaflet sections (P<.001) and between the groups of medicine only with regard to the length over the three studied years (P=.002 in 2007, P=.007 in 2010, P=.009 in 2013). Linear correlation was observed between the readability indexes (SMOG grade and Flesch-Kincaid grade level: r²=.92; SMOG grade and Szigriszt’s perspicuity index: r²=.81; Flesch-Kincaid grade level and Szigriszt’s perspicuity index: r²=.95), but not between the readability indexes and the length (length and SMOG grade: r²=.05; length and Flesch-Kincaid grade level: r²=.03; length and Szigriszt’s perspicuity index: r²=.02).

Conclusions

There was no improvement in the readability of the package leaflets studied between 2007 and 2013 despite the European Commission’s 2009 guideline on the readability of package leaflets. The results obtained from the different readability formulas coincided from a qualitative point of view. Efforts to improve the readability of package leaflets for biological medicines are required to promote the understandability and accessibility of this online health information by patients and thereby contribute to the appropriate use of medicines and medicine safety.