Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35517042›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2022

Thai Patients' Drug Safety Knowledge and Perceptions Relating to Different Forms of Written Medicine Information: A Comparative Study.

Kamonphat Wongtaweepkij, Janet Krska, Supawinee Pongpunna, Juraporn Pongwecharak, Narumol Jarernsiripornkul

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kamonphat WongtaweepkijDivision of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-2602-9701
Janet KrskaMedway School of Pharmacy, The Universities of Greenwich and Kent, Kent, UK.
Supawinee PongpunnaPharmacy Department, Queen Sirikit Heart Centre of the Northeast, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Juraporn PongwecharakDivision of Pharmaceutical Care, Faculty of Pharmacy, Rangsit Center, Thammasat University, Pathumthani, Thailand.
Narumol JarernsiripornkulDivision of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0001-5591-9565

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

consumer testingmedication safety knowledgepackage insertspatient information leafletsperceptions of benefits and risks

Identifiers

PMID35517042
PMCPMC9064070

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.