How to Test Mandatory Text Templates: The European Patient Information Leaflet

Evaluation of Medicine Information Leaflets for Omeprazole, Safety Knowledge, and Perceptions of Taking the Medication in Thailand

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare package inserts and patient information leaflets for omeprazole in terms of the quality of and satisfaction with the written medicine information, medication safety knowledge, and perceived benefits and risks.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional, comparative study was conducted at a university hospital in Thailand. Outpatients visiting the pharmacy departments prescribed omeprazole were randomly selected to receive either a package insert or a patient information leaflet. Medication safety knowledge was measured using a set of eight questions. The quality of the written medicine information was measured by the Consumer Information Rating Form. Perceived benefits and risks of the medication were rated using a visual analog scale. Linear regression was used to determine factors associated with perceived benefits and risks.

RESULTS

Of the 645 patients, 293 agreed to answer the questionnaire. 157 and 136 patients were given patient information leaflets and package inserts, respectively. Most respondents were female (65.6%), over half had a degree (56.2%). Patients reading the patient information leaflets had slightly higher overall safety knowledge scores than those reading the package inserts (5.88 ± 2.25 vs 5.25 ± 1.84, p=0.01). Using the Consumer Information Rating Form, the patient information leaflets were given significantly higher scores compared to the package inserts for comprehensibility (19.34±3.92 vs 17.32±3.52, p<0.001) and design quality (29.25 ± 5.00 vs 23.81 ± 5.16, p<0.001). After reading the leaflets, patients receiving the patient information leaflets had significantly higher satisfaction with the information provided (p=0.003). In contrast, those receiving the package inserts rated the risks of omeprazole higher (p=0.007).

CONCLUSION

Demonstrable differences were found from the patient perspective between a package insert and a patient information leaflet for the same medicine, mostly in favour of patient information leaflets. Medicine safety knowledge after reading PI and PIL was similar. However, receiving package inserts provided higher perceived risks from taking the medicine.

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.

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.

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.

Medication Risk Communication in Rheumatology: Where Are We and Where Do We Go from Here?

This paper reviews findings from recent research examining issues related to the risk communication process within the context of rheumatologic conditions. Five specific questions are addressed. First, to what extent do patients with rheumatic disorders exhibit adequate knowledge relevant to disease and medication risks and risk management? Second, what sources do patients use when attempting to find information about disease and medication risks and risk management? Third, what types of information about disease and medication risks and risk management do rheumatologists provide during routine office visits. Fourth, what governmental regulations attempt to increase consumer access to information about medication risks and risk management? Finally, what other educational resources are available to facilitate patient-provider communication concerning disease and medication risks and risk management? The findings reported identify gaps in patient knowledge concerning medication risks and risk management, highlight areas for improvement, and identify resources that may enhance medication risk communication.