BackgroundThe package leaflet included in the packaging of all medicinal products plays an important role in the transmission of medicine-related information to patients. Therefore, in 2009, the European Commission published readability guidelines to try to ensure that the information contained in the package leaflet is understood by patients.ObjectiveThe main objective of this study was to calculate and compare the readability levels and length (number of words) of the package leaflets for biological medicines in 2007, 2010, and 2013.MethodsThe sample of this study included 36 biological medicine package leaflets that were downloaded from the European Medicines Agency website in three different years: 2007, 2010, and 2013. The readability of the selected package leaflets was obtained using the following readability formulas: SMOG grade, Flesch-Kincaid grade level, and Szigriszt’s perspicuity index. The length (number of words) of the package leaflets was also measured. Afterwards, the relationship between these quantitative variables (three readability indexes and length) and categorical (or qualitative) variables were analyzed. The categorical variables were the year when the package leaflet was downloaded, the package leaflet section, type of medicine, year of authorization of biological medicine, and marketing authorization holder.ResultsThe readability values of all the package leaflets exceeded the sixth-grade reading level, which is the recommended value for health-related written materials. No statistically significant differences were found between the three years of study in the readability indexes, although differences were observed in the case of the length (P=.002), which increased over the study period. When the relationship between readability indexes and length and the other variables was analyzed, statistically significant differences were found between package leaflet sections (P<.001) and between the groups of medicine only with regard to the length over the three studied years (P=.002 in 2007, P=.007 in 2010, P=.009 in 2013). Linear correlation was observed between the readability indexes (SMOG grade and Flesch-Kincaid grade level: r2=.92; SMOG grade and Szigriszt’s perspicuity index: r2=.81; Flesch-Kincaid grade level and Szigriszt’s perspicuity index: r2=.95), but not between the readability indexes and the length (length and SMOG grade: r2=.05; length and Flesch-Kincaid grade level: r2=.03; length and Szigriszt’s perspicuity index: r2=.02).ConclusionsThere was no improvement in the readability of the package leaflets studied between 2007 and 2013 despite the European Commission’s 2009 guideline on the readability of package leaflets. The results obtained from the different readability formulas coincided from a qualitative point of view. Efforts to improve the readability of package leaflets for biological medicines are required to promote the understandability and accessibility of this online health information by patients and thereby contribute to the appropriate use of medicines and medic...

Background: Potential look-alike, sound-alike (LASA) errors in outpatient and inpatient prescriptions have been widely described worldwide. However, most strategies of reducing drug name confusion have been only focused on the processes of prescribing and dispensing, often following local rules. Main text: An illustrative recent example about this topic is given: the antidepressant Brintellix® (vortioxetine) (Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.) and the antiplatelet medication Brilinta® (ticagrelor) (AstraZeneca LP). Revision of the initiatives that are currently applied to prevent potential LASA errors in different countries around the world and debate about the emerging strategies that could be implemented in short and mid-term. At present, a common policy worldwide on the authorization of unique names for innovative medicines does not exist. The implication of authorities in topdown strategies and the importance of developing an international health policy on the authorization of unique names for innovative medicines are highlighted in the following piece of opinion. Conclusions: Building and sustaining a culture of patient safety should be considered as a global top-down strategy which involved all the elements in the system (regulatory bodies, manufacturers and suppliers). The precedent established by the FDA in prevention strategies to identify and avoid LASA errors has been extremely important and should lead to international discussion. Coordinated international efforts are urgently needed in this area for the sake of patients' safety.

Objectives: To provide information about the off-label rate of all drug prescriptions in neonates and infants up to 1 year in Spain. Also, to analyse the off-label prescription of medicines under current practice in this age group according to different evidence sources.Study design: A five-year (2015-2019) exploratory observational study about off-label prescription in neonates and infants (0 to 1 year) at primary health care in Spain. All drug prescriptions in this age group were analysed and classified according to their labelling in off-label or on-label. The drugs prescribed off-label were subsequently reviewed in national formularies and other databases to assess its evidence of use beyond what is recommended in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC).Results: On average 34.50% of total prescriptions were prescribed off-label according to the SmPC. 17.93% of total prescriptions in neonates and infants up to 1 year old were not based on clinical evidence from SmPC, Pediamécum, BNF or DailyMed. In more than 88% of cases, off-label use was related to the posology section of the SmPC, followed by the therapeutic indications and contraindications sections, in 35.20% and 24.10% of cases, respectively. Almost 13% of off-label drugs were over-the-counter. Salbutamol followed by topical tobramycin and colecalciferol were the drugs most prescribed off-label.Conclusions: Off-label use of drugs remains as an important public health concern, especially for neonates and infants up to 1 year, who receive the greatest proportion of offlabel prescriptions. The evidence-based off-label prescription is a widespread practice that has shown a stable trend during the 5-year study period providing also a certain extent of flexibility to paediatricians in some therapeutic decisions.

ObjectivesTo assess the degree of readability and the length of the package leaflets of biosimilars.SettingThe package leaflets analysed were downloaded from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) website.ParticipantsThe study sample included the package leaflets written in English of all the biosimilars that were authorised by the EMA on 31 August 2017, and whose content was available via the internet on that date (n=35).DesignThis was a cross-sectional analytical study. The readability of the package leaflets of all biosimilars authorised by the EMA in August 2017 was determined applying the Flesch and Flesch-Kincaid formulas. The influence of the following variables on the readability and length was also analysed: package leaflet section, type of biosimilar, date of first authorisation of the biosimilar and type of medicine.ResultsA considerable variation of the package leaflets length was found (3154±803). The readability of all the package leaflets overtook the recommended value for health-related written materials taking into account Flesch-Kincaid Index, and none of the package leaflets were easy to understand according to the Flesch Index. Statistically significant differences (p<0.05) were observed between the sections of package leaflets in readability indices and length. The most difficult sections to understand were those related with the therapeutic indication of medicine and the possible side effects.ConclusionsPackage leaflets for authorised biosimilars may not fulfil the function for which they were designed. The competent organisations could be informed about the possible negative effect on the use of this type of medicines.