2022
DOI: 10.1002/jppr.1824
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Conformity of prescription medication labels with label format and content recommendations

Abstract: Background Prescription medication labels (PMLs) are central in guiding patients to use their medications appropriately. For PMLs to achieve this purpose, their content must enable medication use as desired and be presented in a clear and legible manner. Aim This study assesses the extent to which the format and content of PMLs used in Singapore meet national and/or international recommendations, and if the extent varies across public and private healthcare institutions. Method The format and content variables… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 17 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In particular, dose and dosage frequency were often simplified. PMLs dispensed in Singapore often use non-specific dosing instructions and sometimes express quantitative values in alphabetic characters, such as “Take two tablets two times a day” [ 51 ]. Older adults have found such instructions challenging to interpret, compared to instructions using the universal medication schedule (UMS), such as “morning, noon, evening and bedtime” and numerals [ 27 , 52 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, dose and dosage frequency were often simplified. PMLs dispensed in Singapore often use non-specific dosing instructions and sometimes express quantitative values in alphabetic characters, such as “Take two tablets two times a day” [ 51 ]. Older adults have found such instructions challenging to interpret, compared to instructions using the universal medication schedule (UMS), such as “morning, noon, evening and bedtime” and numerals [ 27 , 52 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%