ArticlePatient preference and adherence2025
Press-Through Packaging versus Bold and Slim Bottle-Type Containers: A Comparative Evaluation of Drug Packaging Usability in Patients with Rheumatic Diseases.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Improved drug adherence and usability over the long term are urgent issues in Japan. Press-through packaging (PTP) is commonly used for prescription and over-the-counter drugs; however, some patients, particularly those with finger deformities or weak functional pinch strength in their hands, have difficulty opening and removing pills from PTP. The present study aimed to investigate whether alternative ways to distribute drugs could be a practical solution for such individuals. Methods: We prepared three types of drug packages/containers, including PTP and "Bold" and "Slim" bottle types, and then conducted evaluations of their usability and preferences among 26 outpatients (22 women, 4 men; mean age: 72.6 years). We also measured the functional pinch and grip strength of the participants and investigated the related usability and preferences. Results: Some patients could not open PTP. On the other hand, every patient, even those with no prior experience, could easily use the Bold and Slim bottle-type containers. The release times (ie, the time it takes to dispense two pills from a container) for PTP and Slim were almost the same. Regarding Bold, the difference between the minimum and maximum release times was the smallest among all three types (Bold mean extraction time = 5.4 ± 2.2 s, p < 0.05). Even among the participants who were able to remove the pills from all three types of packages/containers without any difficulties, Bold required the least amount of time. Regarding the relationship between pinch strength and usability, Bold had a positive correlation with the key pinch position and was preferred by the participants. Conclusion: In the present study, Bold showed faster extraction times and slightly higher preference scores, although these differences were not statistically significant. Although the sample size was small, the participants preferred the Bold bottle-type container, which they found easy to use. These findings suggest that individuals with impaired hand and finger function prefer Bold bottle-type containers as drug packaging. Thus, the use of such packaging could help improve drug adherence and usability for some users over the long term.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.