Usability of FDA-approved medication guides

MS Wolf, J King, EAH Wilson, LM Curtis… - Journal of general …, 2012 - Springer
MS Wolf, J King, EAH Wilson, LM Curtis, SC Bailey, J Duhig, A Russell, A Bergeron, A Daly…
Journal of general internal medicine, 2012Springer
BACKGROUND Medication guides are required documents to be distributed to patients in
order to convey serious risks associated with certain prescribed medicines. Little is known
about the effectiveness of this information to adequately inform patients on safe use.
OBJECTIVE To examine the readability, suitability, and comprehensibility of medication
guides, particularly for those with limited literacy. DESIGN Assessments of suitability and
readability of 185 medication guides, and a sub-study examining change in suitability and …
BACKGROUND
Medication guides are required documents to be distributed to patients in order to convey serious risks associated with certain prescribed medicines. Little is known about the effectiveness of this information to adequately inform patients on safe use.
OBJECTIVE
To examine the readability, suitability, and comprehensibility of medication guides, particularly for those with limited literacy.
DESIGN
Assessments of suitability and readability of 185 medication guides, and a sub-study examining change in suitability and readability from 2006 to 2010 among 32 of the medication guides (Study 1); ‘open book’ comprehension assessment of medication guides (Study 2).
SETTING
Two general internal medicine clinics in Chicago, IL.
PATIENTS
Four hundred and forty-nine adults seeking primary care services, ages 18–85.
MEASUREMENTS
For Study 1, the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM) and Lexile score for readability. For Study 2, a tailored comprehension assessment of content found in three representative medication guides.
RESULTS
The 185 analyzed medication guides were on average 1923 words (SD = 1022), with a mean reading level of 10–11th grade. Only one medication guide was deemed suitable in SAM analyses. None provided summaries or reviews, or framed the context first, while very few were rated as having made the purpose evident (8 %), or limited the scope of content (22 %). For Study 2, participants’ comprehension of medication guides was poor (M = 52.7 % correct responses, SD = 22.6). In multivariable analysis, low and marginal literacy were independently associated with poorer understanding (β = –14.3, 95 % CI –18.0 – –10.6, p < 0.001; low: β = –23.7, 95 % CI –28.3 – –19.0, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
Current medication guides are of little value to patients, as they are too complex and difficult to understand especially for individuals with limited literacy. Explicit guidance is offered for improving these print materials.
Springer
以上显示的是最相近的搜索结果。 查看全部搜索结果