Effectiveness of a risk-minimization activity involving physician education on metabolic monitoring of patients receiving quetiapine: results from two postauthorization safety studies

Evaluation of Physician Knowledge of Safety and Safe Use Information for Intravitreal Aflibercept Injection in Europe: A Second Survey of Physicians Following Dissemination of Updated Risk-Minimization Materials

BACKGROUND

Materials have been distributed in the European Union to inform physicians on the safe use of intravitreal aflibercept (IVT-AFL) as part of the risk-minimization plan for IVT-AFL.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to measure physician knowledge and understanding of key safety information for IVT-AFL.

METHODS

The current study was a follow-up cross-sectional survey ('wave 2') to an earlier survey ('wave 1') examining the effectiveness of the IVT-AFL educational materials by assessing physician knowledge of the key safety information. Based on wave 1 results, the educational materials were revised to focus more on items of key concern (e.g., use in women of childbearing potential, procedural information); physicians in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK completed a questionnaire to evaluate their knowledge of key safety information in the revised educational materials.

RESULTS

Among 454 physician respondents (of 4715 invited; response rate 9.6%), most reported having received the IVT-AFL Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC; 89%) and Prescriber Guide (82%). More than half reported receiving the Injection Procedure Video (54%) and Patient Booklet (65%). The highest percentage of correct answers was observed for questions concerning procedural steps, the most important risks, and safe use as emphasized by the educational materials and the SmPC.

CONCLUSION

Physician knowledge and understanding of safe use of IVT-AFL, including for questions that prompted revisions to the educational materials, suggests the need to reconsider methods for developing educational materials to follow best practices (e.g., focusing on only key messages and pretesting with end users).

Pharmacists' perception of educational material to improve patient safety: A cross-sectional study on practices and awareness in Germany

ABSTRACT

Educational material (EM) addresses particular safety information of medicinal products to healthcare professionals and patients. Since 2016, German national competent authorities label approved EM with a Blue Hand symbol. However, data is scarce regarding its usability as a safety communication tool in pharmacies to improve patient safety. The purpose of this study is to investigate for the first time pharmacists' awareness and perception of EM in the setting of community and hospital pharmacies in Germany.The Drug Commission of German Pharmacists surveyed its nationwide network of 677 community and 51 hospital reference pharmacies, to investigate their awareness and perception of EM. The survey was conducted between January 16 and February 10, 2020 using SurveyMonkey. Data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel.A total of 373 community and 32 hospital pharmacists participated; response rates were 55.1% and 62.8%, respectively. Overall, 320 (85.8%) community and all hospital pharmacists confirmed awareness of EM. Community and hospital pharmacists fully (n = 172, 46.9% and n = 9, 28.1%) or rather (n = 109, 29.7% and n = 10, 31.3%) agreed that EM for healthcare professionals is suitable to reduce risks of medicinal products. Moreover, 237 (64.7%) community and 17 (53.1%) hospital pharmacists confirmed to inform patients or care facilities about EM. Asking pharmacists on their personal perception of EM, the refinement of readability and accessibility was indicated.Pharmacists confirm awareness of EM and its suitability as a safety communication tool. However, from a pharmacists' perspective, the applicability and readability of EM still needs further adjustment to improve patient safety.

Are educational materials on medicinal products reaching out and useful to physicians? A survey of Singapore prescribers’ experiences and preferences

Background:

Effective benefit–risk communication to healthcare professionals plays a vital role in promoting the rational use of medicinal products. The Health Sciences Authority (HSA) of Singapore has implemented Physician Educational Materials (PEMs) and Patient Medication Guides (PMGs) as educational materials to support informed decision-making. To evaluate their effectiveness as a safety communication tool, we sought to understand prescribers’ experiences and preferences with these materials.

Methods:

Invitations to an online survey were emailed to 387 healthcare professionals who had recently purchased the 22 medicinal products with requirements for educational materials in Singapore (“Purchasers”). The survey scope included their experiences with the receipt and usage of the materials, and their preferences towards the types of content and distribution channels for these materials.

Results:

The survey invitation reached 367 purchasers, of which 89 (24%) responded, including 66 who indicated that they had prescribed the surveyed products (“Prescribers”). Although only 47% of prescribers recalled receiving the educational materials, the majority who had used them found them useful in their clinical practice. However, the PMG was used less frequently than the PEM (59% vs 96%), and there was a mismatch between current and preferred distribution methods (mostly hard copies vs electronic copies).

Conclusions:

Prescribers who had received educational materials generally perceived them as being useful in raising awareness on treatment-associated safety concerns. The publication of educational materials on the HSA website and encouraging more routine distribution of PMGs by prescribers may improve their accessibility and facilitate safety communication on medicinal products to healthcare professionals and patients.

Physician and Patient Knowledge of Safety and Safe Use Information for Aflibercept in Europe: Evaluation of Risk-Minimization Measures

BACKGROUND

As part of the risk-management plan for aflibercept in the European Union, materials have been developed to educate physicians and patients in Europe on the safe use of aflibercept.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to measure receipt of the educational materials and to evaluate understanding of key safety information for aflibercept.

METHODS

An observational cross-sectional study among physicians and patients with recent aflibercept experience in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK was conducted. Eligible physicians and patients completed a brief questionnaire regarding their knowledge of key safety information.

RESULTS

Among the 8424 physicians invited to participate in the survey, 428 physicians were eligible, completed the questionnaire, and were included in this analysis. Most physicians reported having received the aflibercept summary of product characteristics (87%) and prescriber guide (77%); approximately half reported receiving the injection procedure video (50%) and patient booklet (54%). Physician knowledge of the most important topics (i.e., side effects; preparing patients for aflibercept injection) was high. Physician knowledge of dosing was high for neovascular (wet) age-related macular degeneration and lower for less commonly prescribed indications. Most physicians knew the contraindications for aflibercept and recognized possible side effects. Among the 874 patients approached about participation in the study, 773 patients were eligible, completed the questionnaire, and were included in the analysis. Patients' reported receipt was relatively low for the aflibercept patient booklet (38%) and the audio CD (23%). Patient knowledge of the health conditions to discuss with a doctor prior to injection was generally high; knowledge about possible side effects varied. Most patients knew that they should speak to a physician immediately if they experienced a possible side effect of aflibercept.

CONCLUSION

Most physicians reported receiving the summary of product characteristics, prescriber guide, and patient booklet; half reported receiving the intravitreal injection procedure video. Patient receipt of the educational material was variable. Observed patterns of knowledge indicated the greatest knowledge of the most important risks emphasized in the educational material and lower knowledge of more complex or less salient aspects of safe use.

Evaluation of Physician Knowledge of the Key Safety Information for Aflibercept in Canada: Evaluation of Risk-Minimization Measures

BACKGROUND

As part of the risk-management plan (RMP) for aflibercept, materials have been developed to educate physicians in Canada on the key safety information and safe use for aflibercept.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study were to assess whether physicians in Canada received and reviewed the aflibercept educational materials (i.e. vial preparation instruction card, intravitreal injection procedure video, and product monograph) and to evaluate their knowledge of key safety information.

METHODS

Retinal specialists and ophthalmologists who prescribe and/or administer aflibercept were recruited to complete a survey. Physicians could complete and return a paper questionnaire by mail or complete the questionnaire online via a study website.

RESULTS

Of the 308 physicians invited to participate in the survey, 95 (31%) completed the questionnaire. Nearly all physicians (98%) reported receiving at least one of the educational materials. The proportion of correct responses to individual questions on storage and preparation of aflibercept ranged from 54 to 98%. Physician knowledge was high on the recommended dose of aflibercept (91%), dose preparation (91-96% on individual items), and dosing guidelines (75-95% on individual items). Most physicians knew the contraindications for aflibercept (89%) and that aflibercept should not be used in pregnancy unless clearly indicated by medical need in which benefits outweigh risks (60%); 21% responded more conservatively that aflibercept should never be used in pregnancy. Knowledge was high for most questions about injection procedures (91-99% on individual items); however, fewer physicians (24%) correctly reported that the eye should be covered with a sterile drape. Knowledge was high for possible side effects (89-100% on individual items) and actions to take in relation to the potential for increased intraocular pressure (86-93% on individual items).

CONCLUSION

Nearly all physicians (98%) reported having received the product monograph, and most (82%) reported having received the vial preparation instruction card; nearly half (46%) reported having received the intravitreal injection procedure video. Physicians' knowledge of the most important topics was high. Knowledge varied for topics that are less frequently encountered (e.g. use in women of childbearing potential) and for recommendations that are not standard medical practice in Canada (e.g. use of sterile drape).

Effectiveness of the golimumab educational program in ensuring healthcare professionals' awareness of risks described in the European risk management plan

BACKGROUND

The golimumab safety awareness study commenced in 2010 to measure, periodically, the awareness of golimumab prescriber healthcare professionals (HCPs) of specific risks associated with golimumab as well as awareness of the requirement to provide a patient alert card to each patient treated with golimumab, as described in the European golimumab educational program. The aim of this study was to measure the awareness of HCPs who prescribe or who intend to prescribe SIMPONI® (golimumab) of the risks potentially related to golimumab and of the requirements for distributing the patient alert card, as described in the golimumab educational program.

METHODS

A structured, quantitative Web-based survey was conducted in 2010, 2012, 2014, and 2016 in eight European countries among HCPs who were at that time current or future prescribers of golimumab for patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, nonradiographic axial spondyloarthritis, or ulcerative colitis.

RESULTS

The overall golimumab risk awareness was high for golimumab prescriber HCPs across the risk statement categories (median awareness in 2016 across categories: 91%). The awareness of the golimumab risks was generally slightly higher among rheumatologists (75-98%) and gastroenterologists (73-97%) than among dermatologists (67-94%). Overall, the awareness of the requirements for handing out the patient alert card to golimumab-treated patients remained steady or increased slightly in 2016 relative to the other surveys.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study show that the awareness of risks associated with golimumab by golimumab prescriber HCPs is high. The information made available to golimumab prescriber HCPs appears to have been sufficient with respect to golimumab risk awareness education.

Design and methods of the 'monitoring outcomes of psychiatric pharmacotherapy' (MOPHAR) monitoring program - a study protocol

Background

At many outpatient departments for psychiatry worldwide, standardized monitoring of the safety of prescribed psychotropic drugs is not routinely performed in daily clinical practice. Therefore it is unclear to which extent the drugs used by psychiatric outpatients are prescribed effectively and safely. These issues warrant structured monitoring of medication use, (pre-existing) co-morbidities, effectiveness and side effects during psychiatric outpatient treatment. Improvement of monitoring practices provides an opportunity to ensure that somatic complications and adverse drug effects are detected and dealt with in a timely manner. Structural support for data collection and follow-up tests seems essential for improvement of monitoring practices in psychiatric outpatients. The implementation of a structured somatic monitoring program as part of routine clinical practice, as we describe in this study protocol, may be a solution.

Methods

In order to address these issues, we developed the innovative program ‘Monitoring Outcomes of Psychiatric Pharmacotherapy (MOPHAR)’. MOPHAR is an infrastructure for implementation of standardized routine outcome monitoring (ROM; including standardized monitoring of treatment effect), monitoring of adverse psychotropic medication effects in psychiatric outpatients, encompassing both somatic adverse effects (e.g. metabolic disturbances) and subjective adverse effects (e.g. sedation or sexual side effects) and medication reconciliation.

Discussion

In the MOPHAR monitoring program, a nurse performs general and psychotropic drug-specific somatic screenings and provides the treating mental health care providers with more and better information on somatic monitoring for treatment decisions. Given our experience regarding implementation of the MOPHAR program, we expect that the MOPHAR program is feasible and beneficial for patients in any MHS organisation. This paper describes the objectives, target population, setting and the composition and roles of the treatment team. It also indicates what measurements are performed at which time points during outpatient treatment in the MOPHAR monitoring program, as well as the research aspects of this project.

Trial registration

MOPHAR research has been prospectively registered with the Netherlands Trial Register on 19th of November 2014. (NL4779).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-3951-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The RIMES Statement: A Checklist to Assess the Quality of Studies Evaluating Risk Minimization Programs for Medicinal Products

INTRODUCTION

Pharmaceutical risk minimization programs involve interventions designed to support safe and appropriate use of medicines. Currently, information regarding the evaluation of these programs is not publicly reported in a standardized and transparent manner. To address this gap, we developed and piloted a quality reporting checklist entitled the Reporting recommendations Intended for pharmaceutical risk Minimization Evaluation Studies (RIMES).

METHODS

Checklist development was guided by three sources: (1) a theoretical framework derived from program theory and process evaluation; (2) public health intervention design and evaluation principles; and (3) a review of existing quality reporting checklists. Two raters independently reviewed 10 recently published (2012-2016) risk minimization program evaluation studies using the proposed checklist. Inter-rater reliability of the checklist was assessed using Cohen's Kappa and Gwet's AC1.

RESULTS

A 43-item checklist was generated. Results indicated substantial inter-rater reliability overall (κ = 0.65, AC1 = 0.65) and for three (key information, design and evaluation) of the four subscales (κ ≥ 0.64, AC1 ≥ 0.64). The fourth subscale (implementation) showed low reliability based on Cohen's Kappa, but substantial reliability based on the AC1 (κ = 0.17, AC1 = 0.61).

CONCLUSIONS

The RIMES statement augments relevant elements from existing quality reporting guidelines with items that address aspects of intervention design, implementation and evaluation specific to pharmaceutical risk minimization programs. Our results show that the RIMES statement reliably measures key dimensions of reporting quality. This tailored checklist is an important first step in improving the reporting quality of risk minimization evaluation studies and may ultimately help to improve the quality of these interventions themselves.

Communication on Safety of Medicines in Europe: Current Practices and General Practitioners' Awareness and Preferences

Introduction

National competent authorities (NCAs) for medicines coordinate communication relating to the safety of medicines in Europe. The effectiveness of current communication practices has been questioned, particularly with regard to reaching general practitioners (GPs).

Objective

The aim of this study was to assess current European NCA safety communication practices and to investigate European GPs’ awareness of and preferences for safety communications on medicines.

Methods

Web-based surveys were distributed among European NCAs and healthcare professionals (HCPs). The survey among regulators was emailed to a representative of each of the 27 European countries participating in the Strengthening Collaboration for Operating Pharmacovigilance in Europe (SCOPE) Joint Action. HCPs from nine European countries (Denmark, Spain, Croatia, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the UK) were asked about their preferences through a link to the survey on websites, in newsletters, and/or in a direct email. From this survey, data from GPs were used and descriptive analyses were conducted.

Results

Current NCA practices were reported for 26 countries. In 23 countries (88%), NCAs published direct healthcare professional communications (DHPCs, i.e. urgent communication letters for serious safety issues) on their website in addition to distribution to individual HCPs. Educational materials were available on the NCA’s website in 10 countries (40%), and 21 NCAs (81%) indicated they had their own bulletin/newsletter, which is often presented on the NCA’s website (15 countries; 60%). More than 90% of the 1766 GPs who completed the survey were aware of DHPCs. The most preferred senders of safety information were NCAs and professional bodies, while the preferred channels for keeping up to date with safety information were medicines reference books and clinical guidelines. GPs found the repetition of safety issues useful (range of 80% in the UK to 97% in Italy). Preference for an electronic copy rather than a hardcopy varied per country (36% in Sweden to 72% in Spain).

Conclusions

NCAs use similar methods for safety communications on medicines. Most GPs were aware of urgent communications and preferred similar senders of safety communications; however, their preferences towards the format differed per country.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40264-017-0535-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Evaluation of Risk-Minimization Activities for Cyproterone Acetate 2 mg/Ethinylestradiol 35 µg: A Cross-Sectional Physician Survey

Background

Cyproterone acetate 2 mg/ethinylestradiol 35 µg, an estrogen/progestogen treatment with anti-androgenic properties, shares a thromboembolism risk with combined hormonal contraceptives. Educational materials (i.e., direct healthcare professional communication, patient information card, prescriber checklist) were distributed to physicians to increase risk awareness.

Objective

The objective of this study was to measure physician knowledge of thromboembolism risk of cyproterone acetate 2 mg/ethinylestradiol 35 µg and ascertain whether physicians received the educational materials.

Methods

A cross-sectional web-based physician survey of recent prescribers of cyproterone acetate 2 mg/ethinylestradiol 35 µg in Austria, the Czech Republic, France, the Netherlands, and Spain was conducted. Sampling targets for physician specialty were based on country-specific prescribing patterns. Frequency of correct responses was calculated for 14 knowledge questions.

Results

Among 759 physician respondents (37% of obstetricians/gynecologists, 42% of general practitioners, 20% of dermatologists), 51% received one or more of three educational materials. Knowledge was highest (≥80%) for symptoms of possible deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and cerebrovascular accident; most important risk factors for thrombosis; use in smokers; indication for moderate-to-severe acne; and understanding that cyproterone acetate 2 mg/ethinylestradiol 35 µg should not be used for contraception alone. Knowledge varied for contraindications, myocardial infarction symptoms, other risk factors for thrombosis, instructions regarding anticipated prolonged immobilization, and selected concomitant medical conditions. Knowledge was lower regarding prescribing cyproterone acetate 2 mg/ethinylestradiol 35 µg for acne only after failure of topical therapy or systemic antibiotics. Generally, knowledge did not vary by physician specialty, receipt of educational materials, number of patients prescribed cyproterone acetate 2 mg/ethinylestradiol 35 µg in the previous 3 months, and years in practice.

Conclusions

Knowledge was generally high for thromboembolism risk and varied for more complex or infrequent topics.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40290-017-0203-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.