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

The Use of Podcasts as Patient Preparation for Hospital Visits-An Interview Study Exploring Patients' Experiences

INTRODUCTION

Podcasts have emerged as a promising tool in patient preparation for hospital visits. However, the nuanced experiences of patients who engage with this medium remain underexplored.

OBJECTIVES

This study explored patients' experiences of receiving information by way of podcasts prior to their hospital visits.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients with suspected chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), lung cancer, or sleep apnea. The method of data analysis chosen was thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Based on data from 24 interviews, five key themes were identified: technical challenges in utilization of podcasts; individual preferences for information prior to hospital visits; building trust and reducing anxiety through podcasts; the role of podcasts as an accessible and convenient source of information; and enhancement of engagement and empowerment through podcasts. Additionally, the study highlighted the critical importance of tailoring podcasts' content to individual preferences to optimize the delivery of healthcare information.

CONCLUSIONS

Podcasts can serve as a meaningful supplement to traditional information sources for patients. However, it is important to recognize that not all patients may be able to engage with this medium effectively due to technical challenges or personal preferences.

Perceptions of conflicting information about long-term medications: a qualitative in-depth interview study of patients with chronic diseases in the Swiss ambulatory care system

OBJECTIVE

Patients with multiple long-term conditions visit various healthcare professionals and are exposed to medication information from various sources causing an increased risk of patients perceiving contradictory medication information. The aims of this study are to: (1) characterise conflicting medication information perceived by patients with long-term conditions, (2) better understand the related impact on patients' medication self-management and healthcare system navigation and (3) explore ways in which such events could be prevented.

DESIGN

This study was conducted through qualitative semistructured interviews. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

SETTING

Community pharmacies and medical centres in Geneva, Switzerland.

PARTICIPANTS

This study included outpatients from April 2019 to February 2020. Patients were included after participating in a quantitative survey of perceived conflicting information about medications for long-term diseases.

METHODS

Semistructured audiotaped interviews of 20 to 60 min following a pre-established interview guide to explore participants' perceptions of conflicting information. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and a thematic analysis was conducted with inductive and deductive coding using MAXQDA (2018, Release 18.2.3).

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients were interviewed, until data saturation, mentioning indication or need for a medication as the main topic of conflicting information between two healthcare professionals. Perceived conflicting information often resulted from insufficient information provided and poor communication leading to confusion, doubts and medication non-adherence. Patients expected more information and more interprofessional communication on their medications. As a result of conflicting information, most participants learnt or were learning to take an active role and become partners of the healthcare providers.

CONCLUSION

The need to strengthen and improve communication and interprofessional collaborative practice among healthcare professionals and with the patient is emerging to increase the quality and consistency of information about medications, and consequently, to ensure better use and experience of medications.

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.

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.

The Effectiveness and Value of Written Medicine Information Across Asia and Africa: Systematic Review

Reviews on the role, value, effectiveness and desirable content of written medicine information (WMI) mostly include studies from high-income countries. We reviewed studies from Africa and Asia published between January 2004 and December 2019 to determine (1) the effect of WMI on knowledge and behaviour and (2) whether patients value WMI and their preferences for WMI. We included 16 intervention studies involving almost 3500 participants and 27 surveys of patients/public totalling over 11,000 people. Both the quality of the intervention studies and the reporting quality varied. Surveys were mostly localised, many with inadequate sampling strategies, and hence, were poorly representative of wider populations. However, most included a high proportion of participants with low educational levels. Most of the intervention studies reported significant improvements in knowledge and/or adherence after provision of WMI. Many utilised specially developed WMI in local languages, enhanced by pictograms. Provision of verbal information in addition to WMI showed variable impact. The proportion of people who read WMI, used as an indicator of its value, was reported in 15 surveys, with an overall figure of 74%. The most desirable aspects of WMI reported in 12 studies were indication, side effects, dose/instructions for use, contraindications, precautions and interactions. Nine studies reported local language was desirable. The studies suggest that WMI can improve both knowledge and adherence and is highly valued by people in many countries across Africa and Asia. Mechanisms should be considered by regulatory authorities and manufacturers to facilitate the provision of leaflets in local languages using simple terminology, perhaps enhanced by pictograms.This study is registered with PROSPERO, registration number: CRD42019127001.