School of Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.
Drug Saf. 2013 Aug;36(8):673-80. doi: 10.1007/s40264-013-0065-3.
Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are common, and information about medicines is increasingly widely available to the public. However, relatively little work has explored how people use medicines information to help them assess symptoms that may be suspected ADRs.
Our objective was to determine how patients use patient information leaflets (PILs) or other medicines information sources and whether information use differs depending on experiences of suspected ADRs.
This was a cross-sectional survey conducted in six National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in North West England involving medical in-patients taking at least two regular medicines prior to admission. The survey was administered via a questionnaire and covered use of the PIL and other medicines information sources, perceived knowledge about medicines risks/ADRs, experiences of suspected ADRs, plus demographic information.
Of the 1,218 respondents to the survey, 18.8 % never read the PIL, whilst 6.5 % only do so if something unexpected happens. Educational level was related to perceived knowledge about medicines risks, but not to reading the PIL or seeking further information about medicines risks. Over half the respondents (56.0 %) never sought more information about possible side effects of medicines. A total of 57.2 % claimed they had experienced a suspected ADR. Of these 85.9 % were either very sure or fairly sure this was a reaction to a medicine. Over half of those experiencing a suspected ADR (53.8 %) had read the PIL, of whom 36.2 % did so before the suspected ADR occurred, the remainder afterwards. Reading the PIL helped 84.8 % of these respondents to decide they had experienced an ADR. Educational level, general knowledge of medicines risks and number of regular medicines used all increased the likelihood of experiencing an ADR.
More patients should be encouraged to read the PIL supplied with medicines. The results support the view that most patients feel knowledgeable about medicines risks and suspected ADRs and value information about side effects, but that reading about side effects in PILs or other medicines information sources does not lead to experiences of suspected ADRs.
药物不良反应（ADR）很常见，公众获取药品信息的途径也越来越广泛。然而，很少有研究探讨人们如何利用药品信息来帮助他们评估疑似 ADR 的症状。
我们的目的是确定患者如何使用患者用药指南（PIL）或其他药品信息来源，以及信息使用是否因疑似 ADR 经历而异。
这是一项在英格兰西北部六家国民保健服务（NHS）医院进行的横断面调查，涉及入院前至少服用两种常规药物的住院患者。该调查通过问卷进行，涵盖了 PIL 和其他药品信息来源的使用情况、对药品风险/ADR 的认知、疑似 ADR 经历，以及人口统计学信息。
在接受调查的 1218 名患者中，18.8%的人从不阅读 PIL，而 6.5%的人仅在出现意外情况时才阅读。教育程度与对药品风险的认知有关，但与阅读 PIL 或寻求更多药品风险信息无关。超过一半的受访者（56.0%）从不寻求更多关于药品可能副作用的信息。共有 57.2%的受访者声称曾经历过疑似 ADR。其中 85.9%的人非常确定或相当确定这是对药物的反应。在经历疑似 ADR 的患者中，有 53.8%的人阅读过 PIL，其中 36.2%是在疑似 ADR 发生之前阅读的，其余的是在之后阅读的。阅读 PIL 帮助其中 84.8%的受访者确定自己经历了 ADR。经历疑似 ADR 的可能性随着教育程度、对药品风险的一般认知和使用的常规药物数量的增加而增加。
应鼓励更多的患者阅读药品随附的 PIL。研究结果支持这样一种观点，即大多数患者认为自己对药品风险和疑似 ADR 有足够的了解，并重视有关副作用的信息，但阅读 PIL 或其他药品信息来源中的副作用信息并不会导致疑似 ADR 的经历。
