Suppr超能文献

零售药店所分发的消费者用药信息评估。

Evaluation of consumer medication information dispensed in retail pharmacies.

作者信息

Winterstein Almut G, Linden Stephan, Lee Abigail E, Fernandez Erica M, Kimberlin Carole L

机构信息

Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, College of Pharmacy, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Florida Food and Drug Administration/Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Box 100496, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA.

出版信息

Arch Intern Med. 2010 Aug 9;170(15):1317-24. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.263.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

United States retail pharmacies are key sources of written consumer medication information (CMI) through leaflets dispensed with prescription drugs. The content and format of this CMI are unregulated. Public Law 104-180 stipulates that by 2006, 95% of prescriptions be accompanied by "useful" CMI.

METHODS

Professional shoppers filled prescriptions for lisinopril and metformin in a national sample of 365 pharmacies. Dispensed CMI was evaluated according to explicit criteria (77 for lisinopril and 78 for metformin) adapted from Food and Drug Administration guidelines.

RESULTS

Six percent of pharmacies did not provide any written CMI. A mean (SD) of 60.2% (20.7%) and 57.7% (20.1%) of the criteria for useful CMI were met for lisinopril and metformin prescriptions, respectively. Shortcomings concerned especially "directions about use" with means of 53.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 51.4%-56.5%) and 45.6% (43.7%-47.6%), and "comprehensibility/legibility," with means of 43.8% (42.6%-44.9%) and 42.6% (41.1%-43.7%) for lisinopril and metformin, respectively. The CMI leaflets ranged from 33 to 2482 words, with more than 1000-word differences among those meeting higher than 80% of the content criteria, suggesting large variations in conciseness. Chain pharmacies had better adherence to content criteria than did independent stores, with mean differences of 22.1% (95% CI, 15.8%-28.4%) for lisinopril and 21.1% (95% CI, 14.9%-27.3%) for metformin.

CONCLUSIONS

Although distribution through pharmacies seems effective, the content, format, reading level, and excessive length of CMI are disconcerting. Private sector initiatives to provide useful CMI have failed. Research is needed on effective information selection and presentation in terms of effects on comprehension, retention, and appropriate patient actions to derive optimal drug benefit.

摘要

背景

美国零售药店是通过随处方药发放的传单提供书面消费者用药信息(CMI)的主要来源。这种CMI的内容和格式不受监管。公法104 - 180规定,到2006年,95%的处方应附有“有用的”CMI。

方法

专业购物者在全国365家药店的样本中为赖诺普利和二甲双胍配药。根据源自美国食品药品监督管理局指南的明确标准(赖诺普利77项,二甲双胍78项)对发放的CMI进行评估。

结果

6%的药店未提供任何书面CMI。赖诺普利和二甲双胍处方分别满足有用CMI标准的平均(标准差)比例为60.2%(20.7%)和57.7%(20.1%)。不足之处尤其涉及“用法说明”,比例分别为53.4%(95%置信区间[CI],51.4% - 56.5%)和45.6%(43.7% - 47.6%),以及“易懂性/易读性”,赖诺普利和二甲双胍的比例分别为43.8%(42.6% - 44.9%)和42.6%(41.1% - 43.7%)。CMI传单字数从33字到2482字不等,在满足超过80%内容标准的传单中相差超过1000字,表明简洁性差异很大。连锁药店比独立药店对内容标准的遵守情况更好,赖诺普利的平均差异为22.1%(95% CI,15.8% - 28.4%),二甲双胍为21.1%(95% CI,14.9% - 27.3%)。

结论

尽管通过药店分发似乎有效,但CMI的内容、格式、阅读水平和篇幅过长令人担忧。私营部门提供有用CMI的举措失败了。需要就有效信息的选择和呈现方式对理解、记忆和患者正确行动的影响进行研究,以获得最佳药物效益。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验