Is less more? Patients' preferences for drug information leaflets

Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety

Volumn 20, Issue 9, 2011, Pages 987-995

  Schwappach, David L B ^a,b   Mülders, Verena ^c   Simic, Dusan ^c   Wilm, Stefan ^c   Thürmann, Petra A ^c,d  

^a Swiss Patient Safety Foundation   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WITTEN HERDECKE   (Germany)

^d HELIOS KLINIKUM WUPPERTAL   (Germany)

Author keywords

Drug information; Patient education; Preference assessment

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COLOR; DRUG INFORMATION; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERRATER RELIABILITY; INTERVIEW; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS DESIGN; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DATA COLLECTION; DRUG LABELING; EDUCATION; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PATIENT SATISFACTION;

EID: 80052374767     PISSN: 10538569     EISSN: 10991557     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pds.2212     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Haynes RB, Ackloo E, Sahota N, McDonald HP, Yao X. Interventions for enhancing medication adherence. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008 Issue 2. Art. No.: CD000011. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD000011.pub3.
2. Haywood K, Marshall S, Fitzpatrick R. Patient participation in the consultation process: A structured review of intervention strategies. Patient Educ Couns 2006; 63: 12-23.
3. Cramer JA, Mattson RH, Prevey ML, Scheyer RD, Ouellette VL. How Often Is Medication Taken as Prescribed? A Novel Assessment Technique. JAMA 1989; 261: 3273-3277.
4. Gurwitz JH, Field TS, Harrold LR, et al. Incidence and Preventability of Adverse Drug Events Among Older Persons in the Ambulatory Setting. JAMA 2003; 289: 1107-1116.
5. Rasmussen JN, Chong A, Alter DA. Relationship Between Adherence to Evidence-Based Pharmacotherapy and Long-term Mortality After Acute Myocardial Infarction. JAMA 2007; 297: 177-186.
6. Edwards A, Elwyn G, Hood K, et al. Patient-based outcome results from a cluster randomized trial of shared decision making skill development and use of risk communication aids in general practice. Fam Pract 2004; 21: 347-354.
7. Street RLJ, Makoul G, Arora NK, Epstein RM. How does communication heal? Pathways linking clinician-patient communication to health outcomes. Patient Educ Couns 2009; 74: 295-301.
8. Kessels RPC. Patients' memory for medical information. JRSM 2003; 96: 219-222.
9. Tarn DM, Heritage J, Paterniti DA, Hays RD, Kravitz RL, Wenger NS. Physician Communication When Prescribing New Medications. Arch Intern Med 2006; 166: 1855-1862.
10. Berry DC, Raynor DK, Knapp P, Bersellini E. Patients' Understanding of Risk Associated with Medication Use: Impact of European Commission Guidelines and Other Risk Scales. Drug Saf 2003; 26: 1-11.
11. Carrigan N, Raynor DK, Knapp P. Adequacy of Patient Information on Adverse Effects: An Assessment of Patient Information Leaflets in the UK. Drug Saf 2008; 31: 305-312.
12. Gigerenzer G, Edwards A. Simple tools for understanding risks: from innumeracy to insight. BMJ 2003; 327: 741-744.
13. Nink K, Schröder H. Zu Risiken und Nebenwirkungen: Lesen Sie die Packungsbeilage? (In German). Wissenschaftliches Institut der AOK: Bonn, Germany: 2005.[available at, last accessed 2-5-2011].
14. Ryan M, Bate A, Eastmond CJ, Ludbrook A. Use of discrete choice experiments to elicit preferences. Qual Health Care 2001; 10: I55-I60.
15. Schwappach DLB, Strasmann TJ. Does location matter? A study of the publics preferences for surgical care provision. J Eval Clin Pract 2007; 13: 259-264.
16. Hundley V, Ryan M, Graham W. Assessing women's preferences for intrapartum care. Birth 2001; 28: 254-263.
17. Gerard K, Lattimer V, Turnbull J, et al. Reviewing emergency care systems 2: measuring patient preferences using a discrete choice experiment. Emerg Med J 2004; 21: 692-697.
18. Schwappach DLB. Smoking behavior, intention to quit, and preferences towards cessation programs among gay men living in Zurich, Switzerland. Nicotine Tob Research 2008; 10: 1783-1787.
19. Schwappach DLB, Strasmann TJ. "Quick and dirty numbers"? The reliability of an internet-based stated-preference technique for the measurement of preferences for resource allocation. J Health Econ 2006; 25: 432-448.
20. Thurmann PA, Mulders V, Simic D, Herber O, Schwappach D, Wilm S. Patients' preferences for written information about effects and undesirable side effects of drugs. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol 2010; 107: 616.
21. Bradley M. Users manual for SPEED. version 2.1 stated preference editor and designer. Hague Consulting Group: The Hague, 1991.
22. Street DJ, Burgess L. The construction of optimal stated choice experiments. John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, New Jersey, 2007.
23. Hensher DA, Rose JM, Greene WH. Applied choice analysis. Cambridge University Press: A primer. Cambridge, 2005.
24. Bateman IJ, Carson RT, Day B, et al. Economic valuation with stated preference techniques. Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, 2002.
25. Ryan M, Gerard K, Amaya-Amaya M. Using discrete choice experiments to value health and health care. Springer: Dordrecht, 2008.
26. Louviere JJ, Hensher DA, Swait JD. Stated choice methods. Analysis and applications. Cambridge University Press: New York, 2000.
27. Ende J, Kazis L, Ash A, Moskowitz M. Measuring patients' desire for autonomy. J Gen Intern Med 1989; 4: 23-30.
28. Scott A. Identifying and analysing dominant preferences in discrete choice experiments: An application in health care. J Econ Psych 2002; 23: 383-398.
29. Bryan S, Dolan P. Discrete choice experiments in health economics. For better or for worse? Eur J Health Econ 2004; 5: 199-202.
30. Ancker JS, Senathirajah Y, Kukafka R, Starren JB. Design Features of Graphs in Health Risk Communication: A Systematic Review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006; 13: 608-618.
31. Fortin J, Hirota L, Bond B, O'Connor A, Col N. Identifying patient preferences for communicating risk estimates: A descriptive pilot study. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2001; 1: 2.
32. Whatley S, Mamdani M, Upshur REG. A randomised comparison of the effect of three patient information leaflet models on older patients treatment intentions. Br J Gen Pract 2002; 52: 483-484.
33. Dolan J, Iadarola S. Risk communication formats for low probability events: an exploratory study of patient preferences. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2008; 8: 14.
34. Raynor DK, Blenkinsopp A, Knapp P et al. A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative research on the role and effectiveness of written information available to patients about individual medicines. Health Technol Assess 2007; 11: 1-160.
35. European Commission. Guideline on the readability of the labelling and package leaflet of medicinal products for human use. Revision 1. Bruxelles: EU, 2007.
36. Fuchs J, Hippius M, Schaefer M. Analysis of German package inserts. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 2006; 44: 8-13.
37. Bernardini C, Ambrogi V, Fardella G, Perioloi L, Grandolini G. How to improve the readability of the patient package leaflet: a survey on the use of colour, print size and layout. Pharmacol Res 2001; 43: 437-444.
38. Fuchs J, Banow S, Göbert N, Hippius M. Importance of package insert information in the European Union. Pharm Ind 2007; 69: 165-172.
39. NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement. Toolkit for producing patient information. Version 2.0. Available from: Accessed 10-2-2011.
40. Lee DYL, Armour C, Krass I. The development and evaluation of written medicines information for Type 2 diabetes. Health Educ Res 2007; 22: 918-930.
41. Bonaccorso S, Sturchio JL. What information do patients need about medicines? Perspectives from the pharmaceutical industry. BMJ 2003; 327: 863-864.
42. Kennedy JG. "Doc, tell me what I need to know"-a doctor's perspective. BMJ 2003; 327: 862-863.
43. Olsen AK, Whalen MD. Public Perceptions of the Pharmaceutical Industry and Drug Safety: Implications for the Pharmacovigilance Professional and the Culture of Safety. Drug Saf 2009; 32: 805-810.