Shaping medicinal product information: a before and after study exploring physicians’ perspectives on the summary of product characteristics

Abstract

ObjectiveTo establish, in the context of the revised European Pharmacovigilance Directive and based on physicians’ perspectives, how Summaries of Product Characteristics (SmPCs) could be more user friendly and better support physicians’ interactions with patients, thereby improving patients’ own understanding of their medicines.DesignQualitative focus group discussions (step 1), development of an alternative SmPC (step 2) and an online quantitative survey (step 3) comparing the alternative SmPC to the currently approved version.SettingOffice-based physicians (n=218) from all federal states of Germany.Participants218 German physicians participated, with an equal representation of office-based general practitioners and specialists. For step 1 (n=18), physicians were recruited who frequently consulted SmPCs.Outcome measuresPlanned and performed: Mayring's qualitative content analysis of focus group discussions (step 1), rating on a five-point Likert scale of preference of current versus alternative SmPCs (step 3).ResultsPhysicians confirmed the importance of SmPCs as a comprehensive source of medicinal product information, but were moderately satisfied with the current SmPCs, utilised it infrequently and were more likely to engage additional sources of information. The alternative SmPC was consistently preferred. It differed in the way information for particular patient groups was presented, included additional sections (synopsis, checklist for patient information) and used a tabular format. Physicians indicated that SmPCs should be available with search and hyperlink functions, as well as be automatically updated and integrated in available practice software or similar solutions.ConclusionsThis research contributes to the development of an official, reliable medicinal product information system meeting the needs of a modern information society while providing the reliability of an officially authorised source. In the context of health literacy, SmPCs should be established as the primary information source for healthcare professionals to ensure compliant and safe utilisation of medicinal products.

Evaluation of clarity of presentation and applicability of monitoring instructions for patients using lithium in clinical practice guidelines for treatment of bipolar disorder

“…Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) provide guidance to health care professionals on patient monitoring . CPGs thus aim to bridge the gap between clinical research and clinical practice and to aid health care professionals in evidence‐based decision making .…”

Quality assessment of structure and language elements of written responses given by seven Scandinavian drug information centres

“…With respect to health care professionals, the practical usefulness of the responses is important. As an example, a qualitative study of the German Summary of Product Characteristics (SPCs) concluded that physicians found them disorganised and difficult to use [9]. …”

Graphical content of medicinal package inserts: an exploratory study to evaluate potential legibility issues

“…Besides the above mentioned regulatory requirements, there are scientific studies specifically done on the positive and negative aspects of using illustrations or other graphic elements in the MPIs and other written documents (e.g. bullets or headings) . Illustrations increase attention, comprehension and recall of health materials, this being particularly relevant for the low‐literate patients, and especially if pictures are associated with written text or oral instructions .…”

“…Given the current regulatory requirements and the existing body of literature, it was considered relevant to characterise the graphic elements in a representative sample of Portuguese MPIs, as well as to evaluate the level of potential users' comprehension regarding illustrations and tables from the sampled MPIs. In this context, two exploratory studies were developed (Study A and B): Study A aimed to a) characterise (quantitatively and qualitatively) all the following key graphical elements, i.e.…”

“…bullets or headings). 20,[23][24][25][26][27] Illustrations increase attention, comprehension and recall of health materials, this being particularly relevant for the low-literate patients, 4,5 and especially if pictures are associated with written text or oral instructions. 11,14,18,20,28,29 For instance, in the US Sojourner et al 20 used three groups of participants (undergraduates, younger adults and elders) to evaluate their satisfaction and recall of written information in three forms (text only, pictures only or text with pictures); overall, the text with pictures was better rated and recalled.…”