Medicine information leaflets for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in Thailand

Patients' Experiences and Preferences for Medicine Information: An International Comparison Between Malaysia, Thailand, Uganda, and England

Background

Verbal and written medicine information are available to the public but the quality, ease of access, ease of understanding and use of these resources varies greatly between countries. Timely access to quality medicine information is essential to support patient safety.

Objective

This international cross-sectional survey, conducted in low-to high-income countries, aimed to compare experiences of and preferences for medicine information sources among respondents with recent medicine use.

Methods

The survey was originally developed in England (Kent), then adapted and translated for use in southern Thailand (Songkhla), Malaysia (Klang Valley), and central Uganda (Kampala). Data were analysed using simple descriptive statistics and Chi-squared tests.

Results

A total 1588 respondents were involved in the study. Community pharmacies were the primary source of medicines in all four countries (40.7 to 65.3%). Most respondents (1460; 92%) had received at least one form of information with their medicine, but provision of written medicine information (WMI) varied between countries. A manufacturer's leaflet was the most frequent information source for patients in England, while verbal information was common in Thailand, Malaysia and Uganda. There was commonality across countries in the desire for verbal information with or without WMI (1330; 84.8%); aspects of medicine information wanted most frequently were instructions on medicine use (98.3%), indication (98.2%), name (94.4%) and possible side effects (94.3%); and the importance of providing leaflets with all medicines (87.5%). Fewer than 10% in Uganda would use internet based WMI, compared to between 20% and 55% elsewhere.

Conclusion

Preferences for medicine information are similar across countries: verbal information is seen as most desirable, and the most wanted aspects of information are common internationally. Accessibility and understandability are key influences on preferred information sources. In-country regulations and practices should ensure that all medicine users can access the information necessary to maximise safe medicine use.

A Comparative Evaluation of Drug Information Leaflets of Over-the-Counter Medicines in Palestine

Our study aims to conduct an evaluation and comparison between the leaflets of local and imported oral solid over-the-counter medications (OTC) found in the Palestinian markets. Forty-nine leaflets were evaluated using a scoring method and depending on the appearance of 31 headings, along with the use of manual word counting to assess the amount of information within 23 topics of all 31. None of the evaluated PIs, local or imported, completed all 31 criteria. Remarkably, the imported product leaflets achieved higher scores than their local leaflets in 19 out of 31 topics, whereas the local products achieved better scores than the imported agents in only 2 items, and 10 criteria were equally scored between them. None of the PIs mentioned pharmacokinetic information, instructions for converting tablets or capsules into liquid forms, or shelf life. In general, imported leaflets give more detailed information than their local counterparts. The lowest value of the fold difference in mean rank was 0.85 times for the direction of use, and the highest value was 2.43-fold for adverse drug reactions. The results showed a deficiency in the information provided in the local package inserts compared to the imported versions of oral solid OTC medications available in Palestine. These findings encourage the Palestinian Ministry of Health to provide full criteria for pharmaceutical companies to ensure that the leaflets contain sufficient and updated information and ensure that the patients use their drugs safely and effectively.

Evaluation of patient comprehension and quality of consumer medicine information

Background

Consumer medicine information (CMI) is voluntarily produced by pharmaceutical manufacturers in Thailand, but quality assessment of Thai-CMI is not routinely performed.

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the content and design quality of CMI available in Thailand and assess patient understanding of the medicine information provided.

Methods

A cross-sectional study that consisted of two phases. Phase 1 was expert assessment of CMI using 15-item content checklists. Phase 2 was patient assessment of CMI by user-testing and the Consumer Information Rating Form. Participants (n=130) were outpatients aged 18 years or older with an educational level of less than grade 12. Self-administered questionnaires were distributed to patients at two university-affiliated hospitals in Thailand.

Results

A total of 60 CMI produced by 13 Thai pharmaceutical manufacturers were included in the study. Most of the CMI contained essential information about the medicines, but lacked information about serious adverse effects, maximum dose, warnings, and use in specific patient groups. Of 13 CMI selected for user-testing, none met the passing criteria with only 40.8% - 70.0% of answers found in the correct position and answered correctly. The mean values of patients' rating the CMI were between 2.5 (SD=0.8) and 3.7 (SD=0.5) for utility on a 4-point scale, and 2.3 (SD=0.7) to 4.0 (SD=0.8) for comprehensibility and 2.0 (SD=1.2) to 4.9 (SD=0.3) for design quality on a 5-point scale. Eight CMI were rated as poor (less than 3.0) for font size.

Conclusion

More safety information about medications should be included in Thai CMI and the design quality must be improved. CMI needs to be evaluated before distribution to consumers.

Thai Patients' Drug Safety Knowledge and Perceptions Relating to Different Forms of Written Medicine Information: A Comparative Study

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the medication safety knowledge, quality of the written medicine information (WMI), and perceptions of taking the medicines in patients receiving package inserts (PIs) in comparison with patient information leaflets (PILs).

METHODS

A cross-sectional, comparative study was conducted from December 2020 to May 2021 at two university hospitals in Thailand. Outpatients who visited the pharmacy departments and were prescribed one of the three medicines: atorvastatin, celecoxib, or metformin were randomly selected by a permuted block randomization. The medication safety knowledge was measured using a set of validated and closed questions. The quality of the WMI was measured by the Consumer Information Rating Form (CIRF). Satisfaction with information and perceptions of the benefits and risks of medications were rated by the participants using a visual analog scale (0 to 10).

RESULTS

Of the 1150 invited patients, 750 completed the questionnaires (65.2%). A higher proportion of respondents with high level of medication safety knowledge was found in those reading the PILs than the PIs (44.5% and 20.8%, respectively). The type of leaflet received was a significant predictor of the high knowledge level (p < 0.001). The mean CIRF scores were significantly higher among those reading the PILs than the PIs (p < 0.001). Patients reading the PILs were also more satisfied with the information and had more positive perceptions of the benefits from taking medicines and intention to adhere than those reading the PIs. Patients' perceptions of risks after reading both leaflets were moderate (median score = 5.0), with the PIL group having slightly more concern about risks than the PI group.

CONCLUSION

The PILs showed superior effectiveness to the PIs in enhancing knowledge about medication safety, providing greater satisfaction with the information, and positive perceptions of benefit and intention to comply with the medications. PILs should be provided more frequently to patients receiving medicines than PIs.

Provision and Need for Medicine Information in Asia and Africa: A Scoping Review of the Literature

Published reviews of written medicine information (WMI) have mainly drawn on studies published in high-income countries, including very few Asian or African studies. We therefore set out to scope the research literature to determine the extent and type of studies concerning WMI for patients/consumers across these two continents. We sought empirical studies published between January 2004 and December 2019, conducted in any Asian or African country, as defined by the United Nations, in English or with an English abstract. The majority of the 923 papers identified were from high-income countries. We retained 26 papers from Africa and 99 from Asia. Most African studies (n = 20) involved patients in the development of PILs, in the assessment of the effectiveness of PILs or in surveys. In contrast, the highest proportion of Asian studies concerned the content of WMI (n = 42). WMI is desired, but needs to be in local languages, and there needs to be more use made of pre-tested pictograms. Existing WMI frequently does not meet local regulatory requirements, particularly locally manufactured products. A number of studies reported potentially positive impacts of providing WMI on knowledge and medicine use behaviours. Provision of medicine information is essential for safe use of medicines in all countries. Internationally agreed guidelines, incorporating good design principles, are needed to ensure the optimal content and design of WMI. The World Health Organization should support African and Asian regulatory bodies to share best practice in relation to WMI for patients/consumers and to develop and implement pan-continental guidelines that take into account consumer needs and preferences.

Patients' Experiences and Perspectives of Receiving Written Medicine Information About Medicines: A Qualitative Study

PURPOSE

Written medicine information informs patients about the benefits and risks of medicines and supports their safe and effective use. In Thailand, patient information leaflets (PILs) are not obligatory and therefore not routinely supplied. This study aimed to explore the experiences and information needs of patients, their views on PILs and the likely impact of PILs on their knowledge, perceptions and behaviors towards medicines. These factors are important to establish the value of PILs.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with outpatients who received simvastatin or atorvastatin were conducted exploring their experiences of receiving medicine information, their views on the utility of and need for PILs, the impact of PILs on their behaviors, and recommendations for how PILs could be improved. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using a framework approach.

RESULTS

Thirty interviews were conducted from which four themes emerged: experience of receiving medicine information, views of package inserts and PILs, impact of PILs on knowledge, perceptions and behaviors, and patients' need for medicine information. Most participants received verbal information from healthcare professionals, as well as written information. Verbal information was perceived as being particularly useful to inform about changes to medicine regimens or the long-term adverse effects of medicines. Patients perceived that the PILs had influenced their knowledge about medicines, and also their behaviors including safety awareness, adherence, and engagement with healthcare professionals. Participants suggested that the information in electronic format could provide an additional resource. Some changes to improve the content and general format of the PIL were identified.

CONCLUSION

PILs are perceived as useful by patients and met their information needs, although they were viewed as an adjunct to verbal advice provided by healthcare professionals. PILs influenced patients' medicine taking behaviors and encouraged sharing of information with their physicians.

Survey of healthcare professionals' practices, expectations, and attitudes towards provision of patient information leaflets in Thailand

Background Patient information leaflets are an important source of medicine information for patients. In Thailand, there is a lack of studies exploring activities of healthcare professionals and their attitudes towards provision of patient information leaflets. Objectives This study aimed to survey healthcare professionals' practices on provision of medicine information, expectations of, attitudes towards provision of patient information leaflets and factors influencing these. Setting Two university hospitals in Thailand. Methods A self-completion questionnaire was distributed to chiefs of departments for further distribution to staff. A stratified sample of physicians and nurses was invited, while all pharmacists were invited to ensure sufficient numbers for comparison. Main outcome measure Healthcare professionals' practices on provision of medicine information, expectations of, attitudes towards provision of patient information leaflets. Results Of the total 981 healthcare professionals invited, 493 responded (50.3% response rate). The number of respondents aware of patient information leaflets was 270 (57.6%). Of these, only 44.4% had ever given patient information leaflets to patients. Pharmacists provided patient information leaflets more frequently than other healthcare professionals. The expectation for patient information leaflets to be available was high; mean score 7.9 ± 2.31 of possible 10. Most respondents had positive attitudes towards providing patient information leaflets to patients (58.2%). Respondents who were aware of patient information leaflets availability were more likely to have a positive attitude (OR 0.543, p = 0.002). Level of education, time spent in direct care and being aware of patient information leaflets were factors associated with healthcare professionals' attitudes. Conclusion Limited number of healthcare professionals had provided patient information leaflets to patients but most had positive attitudes regarding the usefulness of patient information leaflets for patients. Increased availability and use of patient information leaflets should be promoted.

Experiences and Views of Medicine Information Among the General Public in Thailand

PURPOSE

Written and electronic medicine information are important for improving patient knowledge and safe use of medicines. Written medicine information in Thailand is mostly in the form of printed package inserts (PIs), designed for health professionals, with few medicines having patient information leaflets (PILs). The aim of this study was to determine practices, needs and expectations of Thai general public about written and electronic medicine information and attitudes towards PILs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Cross-sectional survey, using self-completed questionnaires, was distributed directly to members of the general public in a large city, during January to March 2019. It explored experiences of using information, expectations, needs and attitudes, the latter measured using a 10-item scale. Differences between sub-groups were assessed, applying the Bonferroni correction to determine statistical significance.

RESULTS

Of the total 851 questionnaires distributed, 550 were returned (64.2%). The majority of respondents (88%) had received PIs, but only a quarter (26.2%) had received PILs. Most respondents (78.5%) had seen medicine information in online form. High educational level and income increased the likelihood of receiving PILs and electronic information. The majority of respondents (88.5%) perceived PILs as useful, but 70% considered they would still need information about medicines from health professionals. Indication, drug name and precautions were the most frequently read information in PIs and perceived as needed in PILs. Three-quarters of respondents would read electronic information if it were available, with more who had received a PIL having previously searched for such information compared to those who had not. All respondents had positive overall attitudes towards PILs.

CONCLUSION

Experiences of receiving PILs and electronic medicine information in Thailand are relatively limited. However, the general public considered PILs as a useful source of medicine information. Electronic medicine information was desired and should be developed to be an additional source of information for consumers.

Comparative evaluation of drug information leaflets for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in Palestine: local versus imported products

BACKGROUND

Drug information leaflets (DILs) are written for patients and health care providers to show how to use the medications safely and effectively, in order to reach the required therapeutics outcomes. This comparative study was conducted to evaluate various DILs of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) that are produced in Palestine, along with their imported equivalents.

METHODS

Thirty-five DILs of NSAIDs were analyzed and evaluated in a cross-sectional comparative study. Thirty-one statements were obtained from literature and used; evaluation was performed on basis of both any presence or absence of these statements in the leaflets. 23 of the 31 statements that were available in both local and imported DILs were also evaluated in terms of total word-counts: the median (interquartile range) word-count for each statement was determined separately for the two groups and then compared. For the remaining 8 statements, this was not performed,either because they were not present in any leaflet, or because counting the number of words would not be meaningful.

RESULTS

A total of 35 DILs for nine different active ingredients of NSAIDs were analyzed. In 97% of leaflets, "Instructions to convert medication into liquid forms" were missing and 94% did not provide any information about "Pharmacokinetics". 83% of DILs provided no information about "Mechanism of action" and 74% did not mention any reliable references. 66% of the analyzed inserts did not include any instruction about the possibility of a tablet splitting. And in 63%, the "Date of last revision" was missing. Further, "Duration of using" and "Inactive ingredients" were not found in 51% of leaflets. In terms of word-count, the related sections of the 23 selected criteria were expressed with more words by imported leaflets compared with the local ones, significant differences were found in 12 categories, the highest significance of > 42.4-fold difference was found in "Geriatric considerations" category whereas 1.4-fold difference was found in "Shelf life," being the lowest one.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that local products provide less information than imported products, so we recommend that appropriate measurements be taken by both Palestinian authorities and manufacturers to improve both quantity and quality of local DILs.

A comparative evaluation of medicine package inserts for oral antidiabetic agents in Palestine

BACKGROUND

Patient package inserts (PPIs) should provide accurate, sufficient, and clear information for patients as well as health care professionals. The goal of this study was to evaluate and compare the PPIs of local and imported anti-diabetic agents in the Palestinian market.

METHODS

Eighteen leaflets were collected and analysed based on the completeness of 31 criteria using a scoring method, then the quantity of information was assessed by applying word counting of 17 headings and subheadings. Statistical comparisons of the word count for all products were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test with mean ranks. Then the mean ranks for differences in word counts were adjusted to calculate the fold-difference statistic by dividing the higher mean rank by the lower mean rank.

RESULTS

In general, the PPIs of imported agents scored better than local PPIs, but none of the inserts fulfilled the whole criteria. Thirteen out of thirty-one criteria were available in all products. None of these agents had provided any information about duration of use, instructions to convert tablets into liquids forms, pharmacokinetics, or shelf life. Moreover, mechanism of action and maximum dose were deficient in all local PPIs (0.0%), while they were included in 37.5 and 62.5% of imported PPIs, respectively. Furthermore, 90.0% of local PPIs lacked information about drug dose, 80.0% didn't mention any instructions regarding effects on ability to drive or possibility of tablet splitting, and 60.0% didn't involve orders about possibility of tablet crushing. Local PPIs provided inadequate and less detailed instructions regarding many aspects, since the estimated mean rank of local and imported PPIs demonstrated a range of difference from 1.04-fold for missing dose to 2.64-fold for warning and precautions.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant differences were being identified, with excellence being assigned to imported PPIs. So, it is worth suggesting some necessary modifications in PPI topography and sequence structure of local diabetic agents. Experts in Palestinian Ministry of Health should implement regulatory guidelines to improve the quality and quantity of information provided by local PPIs. This optimisation could become a step forward toward optimal health practice in our society.

Development and preliminary validation of an instrument to enable laypersons to assess suspected side effects from medicines

PURPOSE

Research into causality assessment tools enabling patients to assess suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is limited. Supporting patients with tools could improve their confidence in discussions with health professionals and encourage reporting of suspected ADRs to regulators. This study describes development and preliminary validation of an instrument: Side Effect Patient ASsessment Tool (SE-PAST).

METHODS

SE-PAST was developed from survey and interview data involving patients experiencing suspected ADRs. It included 10 statements enabling causality assessment, covering timing, additional information sources, and experiences, with four options: yes/no/don't know/not applicable. Scoring and weighting resulted in four categories of causal association: highly probable, probable, possible, unlikely. Validation involved obtaining feedback from 31 individuals experiencing an ADR. Further validation involved online distribution through patient support groups and comparison of reported symptoms to known ADRs.

RESULTS

Validators found SE-PAST easy to read (31), to understand (27), and to complete (29). A total of 294 respondents completed SE-PAST online, with 98% completing eight or more causality assessment statements. Symptoms were categorised as highly probable (46; 16%), probable (80; 62%), possible (44; 15%), and unlikely (21; 7%). A total of 221 respondents identified one suspected medicine, with 95% of these reporting at least one symptom known to be an ADR. Of 227 providing feedback, 139 (61%) found SE-PAST useful, 160 (71%) felt motivated to discuss their experience with a health professional, and 136 (60%) were encouraged to report to the regulator.

CONCLUSION

SE-PAST was easily completed and understood by people experiencing suspected ADRs and could be useful in encouraging patient reporting to health professionals and agencies.

Practices of healthcare professionals in communicating with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug users in Thailand: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore practices among healthcare professionals in nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) information provision.

METHODS

In-depth interviews were conducted with orthopaedic physicians (OPs), hospital and community pharmacists (CPs) in northeastern Thailand. Ten hospitals and 20 pharmacies in five provinces were purposively selected. Interviews followed a topic guideline, were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a framework approach.

KEY FINDINGS

Fifty-one participants were involved: 13 OPs, 20 hospital pharmacists and 18 CPs. Four main themes emerged: general information, safety information, differences between new and regular NSAID users and non-selective and selective NSAID users. Pharmacists mostly provided information on administration and indication. While all three groups informed of adverse effects, this was selective, related to factors including trading, time available, patients' age and perceived ability to understand. Gastrointestinal adverse effect information was most commonly provided, with other side effects, drug interactions and need to monitor for adverse effects rarely mentioned. Variation was reported in provision of safety information depending on whether patients were using selective or non-selective NSAIDs, and new or long-term users.

CONCLUSIONS

The content and frequency of NSAID information provision varied between health professionals. Greater awareness of NSAID risks is essential; therefore, strategies to improve information provision to Thai patients are desirable.

Development and evaluation of user-tested Thai patient information leaflets for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: Effect on patients' knowledge

INTRODUCTION

Thai patients do not routinely receive patient information leaflets (PILs) with medicines, so awareness of safety issues is low. This study aimed: i) to develop Thai PILs for NSAIDs and subject these to user-testing, and ii) to assess the potential value of PILs from the patient perspective and effect on patient knowledge.

METHODS

Four PILs for NSAIDs were developed and subjected to multiple rounds of user-testing by the general public. Self-administered questionnaires were distributed to orthopaedic out-patients prescribed one of these NSAIDs, assessing knowledge before and after providing a PIL. The follow-up questionnaire also sought use of and views on the PILs using a visual analogue scale (VAS).

RESULTS

1,240 baseline questionnaires were completed; only 13.5% of patients had good knowledge. 688 patients returned follow-up questionnaires (55.5%), of whom75% had good knowledge. In patients completing both questionnaires, mean knowledge score increased from 6.22±1.40 to 8.42±1.41 (p<0.001). Patients with high educational levels had high baseline scores (OR = 2.728) and showed greatest improvement in knowledge (OR = 5.628). 90% (625) of follow-up respondents indicated they read all information in the PILs. All also agreed that these PILs should distributed to all patients taking NSAIDs. The median VAS score for usefulness was 9.3 (IQR 8.6-10.0).

CONCLUSIONS

User-testing of PILs was feasible in a Thai population and enabled the development of acceptable and desirable PILs. PILs could improve patients' knowledge about their medicine, particularly among those with higher educational level. User-tested PILS could meet the need for more written medicine information.

Survey of outpatients' use and needs of patient medicine information leaflets in Thailand

Background Patient information leaflets are important sources of medicine information. Regulations of patient information leaflet provision varies among country. Little is known regarding patients' behavior and expectation on use of patient information leaflets. Objectives To explore patients' use of either package inserts or patient information leaflets and to survey patients' expectations and needs on use of patient information leaflets and their associated factors. Setting Two university hospitals in Thailand. Methods Cross-sectional study using self-administered questionnaires distributed to outpatients over a 3-month period. Participants were selected through systematic random sampling. Logistic regression was used for data analysis. Main outcome measure Patient use of medicine information. Visual Analogue Scale scores for patient needs and their expectation of knowledge gains from using patient information leaflets. Results The response rate was 77.0%. Most respondents had received package inserts (91.3%) with 59.4% reporting that they sometimes read them. While most respondents had not previously known about patient information leaflets (75.9%), 97.3% reported that patient information leaflets would be useful. Respondents scored their needs and expected knowledge gains after reading patient information leaflets as 9.68 ± 0.97 and 9.64 ± 0.99, respectively. Previous experience with package inserts was associated with increased patient need scores (p = 0.002) and higher expected knowledge gains from use of patient information leaflets (p = 0.037). In addition, patients who had not previously known about patient information leaflets had higher expectations of knowledge gains (p = 0.016). Conclusion Overall, patients showed good behavior on reading package inserts. Although many patients were not previously aware of patient information leaflets, they realized the importance. Hence, patient information leaflets should be developed and provided to Thai patients.

Comparative analysis of package inserts of local and imported antihypertensive medications in Palestine

BACKGROUND

Package inserts (PIs) as a reliable reference for patients and health care providers should provide accurate, complete and up-to-date information. The purpose of the current study is to assess and compare the PIs of antihypertensive agents locally produced in Palestine and their imported counterparts.

METHODS

Thirty-five PIs were assessed for the presence of 31 information statements using a scoring method. Word counting of 20 headings and subheadings was used to evaluate and compare local and imported PIs for information quantity.

RESULTS

None of the analysed PIs fulfilled the criteria. All of them included the brand name, active ingredients, indications, directions for use, adverse drug reactions, drug-drug interactions, pregnancy and lactation considerations, and storage. Whereas none of them, either local or imported PIs, included the shelf life and instructions to convert tablets or capsules into liquid forms. Additionally, only one (5%) imported and no (0%) local PIs mentioned the duration of therapy. Moreover, 93.4% of local PIs were deficient in areas regarding the inactive ingredients and date of last revision, and 86.7% did not mention the drug dose and possibility of tablet splitting. Furthermore, the maximum dose was not indicated in 90% of imported and 86.7% of local PIs. In general, imported PIs contained more detailed information than their local counterparts, where the range of differences in medians between the local and imported PIs was from 1.5-fold for pregnancy considerations to >42.00-fold for the effect on the ability to drive and use machines.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study revealed the superiority of imported over local PIs in both quality and quantity of information provided. This emphasises the need for appropriate measures to be taken by the Ministry of Health and local manufacturers to ensure efficiency of local PIs in providing accurate, complete and up-to-date information.

Knowledge and perceptions of the risks of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs among orthopaedic patients in Thailand

Background There is a high incidence of adverse effects from non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in Thailand, but patients' perceptions and knowledge of NSAID risks is unknown. Objective This study aims to assess patients' perceptions and knowledge of NSAID risks and factors affecting them. Setting University hospital in North-East of Thailand. Method A Cross-sectional study conducted over 4 months, using a self-administered questionnaire. Patients prescribed NSAIDs for at least one month duration from orthopaedic clinic were recruited using systematic random sampling. Main outcome measure Patients' perceptions on NSAID risks, knowledge on risk factors, and their associated factors. Results A total of 474 questionnaires were assessed. Overall perceptions of risks was low (scoring below five on a 0-10 visual analogue scale), with risks associated with the renal system scoring highest. Perceived risk of gastrointestinal problems differed between patients using non-selective and selective NSAIDs (3.47 ± 2.75 vs 2.06 ± 2.98; P < 0.001). Receiving side effect information from a health professional was associated with higher risk perception. Most patients (80 %) identified high doses, renal disease and gastrointestinal ulcer increased risks of NSAIDs, but fewer than half recognized that use in the elderly, multiple NSAID use, drinking, hypertension and cardiovascular disease also increased risk of adverse events. Having underlying diseases and receiving side effect information were associated with 1.6-2.0 fold increased knowledge of NSAID risks. Conclusion Perceptions and knowledge concerning NSAID risks was generally low in Thai patients, but higher in those who had received side effect information. Risk-related information should be widely provided, especially in high-risk patients.