Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36328384›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Patients' perceptions of conflicting information on chronic medications: a prospective survey in Switzerland.

Beatriz Santos, Katherine S Blondon, Elisabeth Van Gessel, Bernard Cerutti, Claudine Backes, Sophie Locher, Bertrand Guignard, Pascal Bonnabry, Delesha Carpenter, Marie P Schneider

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

10 authors.

Beatriz SantosInstitute of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Western Switzerland University of Geneva, University of Lausanne, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3701-4583
Katherine S BlondonUnit of Development and Research in Medical Education (UDREM), University of Geneva Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-9407-8516
Elisabeth Van GesselInterprofessional Simulation Center, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Bernard CeruttiUnit of Development and Research in Medical Education (UDREM), University of Geneva Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7929-3373
Claudine BackesInstitute of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Western Switzerland University of Geneva, University of Lausanne, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-3300-4959
Sophie LocherInstitute of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Western Switzerland University of Geneva, University of Lausanne, Geneva, Switzerland.
Bertrand GuignardPharmacy, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Pascal BonnabryInstitute of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Western Switzerland University of Geneva, University of Lausanne, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-8690-649X
Delesha CarpenterDivision of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2025-8140
Marie P SchneiderInstitute of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Western Switzerland University of Geneva, University of Lausanne, Geneva, Switzerland marie.schneider@unige.ch.ORCID 0000-0002-7557-9278

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe number of patients with chronic diseases and subsequent visits to various healthcare professionals has been rising over the past decades, exposing patients to potential risks of receiving conflicting medication information. This study aims to investigate the prevalence of conflicting information on medications perceived by chronic patients in Switzerland and to understand its impact on patients' medication self-management and navigation in the healthcare system.

participantsThis cross-sectional study included adult patients taking at least one prescribed medication for at least 6 months, who had visited at least two physicians in the past 3 months.

main outcome measuresData on patients' perceptions of conflicting information were collected in person through a 17-item questionnaire available on paper and electronically with four domains: (1) whether the patient had perceived any conflicting information, (2) categories of conflicting information, (3) impact and (4) sources involved in the conflicting information.

resultsOf the 405 included patients, 47% perceived conflicting information related to one or more medication topics including indication, schedule, dosage, risk, severity or duration of side effects. Patients who perceived conflicting information were prescribed more drugs than those perceiving no conflicting information (p<0.01). Consequently, 65% of the participants modified their navigation of the healthcare system and 34% reported medication non-adherence. General practitioners (82%), specialist physicians (74%) and pharmacists (49%) were the healthcare professionals most often involved in conflicting information. Experience with the medication, its package insert and significant others were more frequently involved in conflicting information than internet or social media.

conclusionNearly half the patients in our study perceived conflicting information in the outpatient healthcare system, which can decrease medication effectiveness and pose safety issues. This issue is widely overlooked and unaddressed. Consistency of information among healthcare providers in partnership with patients should be reinforced through guidelines and new models of interprofessional care.

Indexed as

Medication AdherencePharmacistsAdultCross-Sectional StudiesHumansProspective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesSwitzerlandGENERAL MEDICINE (see Internal Medicine)Health & safetyPRIMARY CAREQuality in health careTHERAPEUTICS

Identifiers

PMID36328384
PMCPMC9639071

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.