Inappropriate dosage instructions in package inserts.

OBJECTIVE Regardless of all efforts by the supervisory authority and the manufacturers to ensure that package inserts are patient-oriented, they are still under discussion. The survey package insert test (PAINT) aimed to examine the availability and comprehensibility of the information contained on five package inserts and five model versions for the same drugs. METHODS A questionnaire containing 15 questions referring to the package insert contents was developed for a written survey. In a cross-over test design, each participant received an original package insert and a newly developed model version within an interval of 4 weeks. RESULTS One thousand one hundred and five participants gave significantly more correct answers (92.6-94.4%) to all 15 questions relating to the model package inserts, in comparison to the originals (74.7-85.8%). Most of the problems regarding the original versions were associated with the fact that the dosage instructions were given in active substance quantities rather than "tablet" or "volume", non-quantifiable phrases in the dosage instructions (e.g. take 1-3 times 2-4 tablets) and in the frequency of side effects (e.g. rare). Information regarding suitable counter measures to possible side effects, was also difficult to understand. CONCLUSION Optimizing package inserts, particularly dosage instructions and information regarding possible side effects, is essential and achievable. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Our recommendations are as follows: (1) every dose should be quantified in number of tablets or in volume; (2) use a dosage instruction table; (3) provide short and precise information only; (4) do not use non-quantifiable statements.

[1]  M. Wolf,et al.  Literacy and Misunderstanding Prescription Drug Labels , 2007, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[2]  J Fuchs,et al.  Analysis of German package inserts. , 2006, International journal of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[3]  Cheryl Twomey,et al.  An analysis of patient information leaflets supplied with medicines sold by pharmacists in the United Kingdom , 2009 .

[4]  M Duman,et al.  Patient information leaflets for medicines: using consumer testing to determine the most effective design. , 2001, Patient education and counseling.

[5]  Impact of Benefit Messages in Patient Package Inserts on Subjective Drug Perception , 2002 .

[6]  R. V. Stichele Impact of written drug information in patient package inserts: Acceptance and impact on benefit/risk perception , 2004 .

[7]  J. Paling Strategies to help patients understand risks , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[8]  V. Ambrogi,et al.  Comprehensibility of the package leaflets of all medicinal products for human use: a questionnaire survey about the use of symbols and pictograms. , 2000, Pharmacological research.

[9]  V. Ambrogi,et al.  How to improve the readability of the patient package leaflet: a survey on the use of colour, print size and layout. , 2001, Pharmacological research.

[10]  P. Aslani,et al.  Factors Influencing Consumer Use of Written Drug Information , 2003 .

[11]  R. Vollandt,et al.  Multiple Tests und Auswahlverfahren. , 1998 .

[12]  P. Knapp,et al.  Provision of information about drug side-effects to patients , 2002, The Lancet.

[13]  P. Aslani,et al.  Consumer opinions on medicines information and factors affecting its use — an Australian experience , 2002 .

[14]  Gillian Hawker,et al.  How "bad" does the pain have to be? A qualitative study examining adherence to pain medication in older adults with osteoarthritis. , 2006, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[15]  W. Waters,et al.  Knowledge of and attitudes to medicines in the Southampton community. , 1986, British journal of clinical pharmacology.

[16]  Servizio di Informazione e di Educazione Sanitaria What information for the patient? Large scale pilot study on experimental package inserts giving information on prescribed and over the counter drugs. , 1990, BMJ.