It’s for your benefit: exploring patients’ opinions about the inclusion of textual and numerical benefit information in medicine leaflets

Kim Hamrosi; Rebecca Dickinson; Peter  Knapp; David K. Raynor; Ines Krass; Julie Sowter; Parisa Aslani

doi:10.1111/j.2042-7174.2012.00253.x

It’s for your benefit: exploring patients’ opinions about the inclusion of textual and numerical benefit information in medicine leaflets

Kim Hamrosi, Rebecca Dickinson, Peter Knapp, David K. Raynor, Ines Krass, Julie Sowter, Parisa Aslani

The Hull York Medical School

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Objectives To explore consumers’ beliefs and preferences for benefit information in medicine leaflets and examine their understanding and reaction to treatment benefits. Methods Forty-five participants were recruited to eight focus groups, run concurrently in Australia (23 participants in four groups) and the UK (22 participants in four groups). Participants were provided with amended leaflets based on the medicine clopidogrel, containing textual and numerical benefit information presented using numbers needed to treat (NNT).A topic guide which explored use of leaflets, preferences and opinions was used to direct discussion. Focus group discussions were recorded, transcribed verbatim and content analysed using adapted cross-case study analysis. Key findings The consensus was that the inclusion of benefit information was a positive factor. Many participants felt that textual benefit information offered an incentive to take a medicine, although some Australian participants had concerns that included benefit information could create anxiety.The presentation of numerical benefit information provoked strong feelings of disbelief and shock. Participants were surprised that so few people would benefit. Some participants struggled to understand and interpret the NNT and others found it difficult to comprehend the magnitude of the benefit information, instead operating on initial and often crude assumptions of what the data meant. In both countries the provision of numerical benefit information appeared to shake participants’ faith in drug treatments.Participants were concerned about how this might affect the ‘less-informed’ patient. However, in the UK, participants stated that their adherence to treatment was also reinforced by their doctor’s advice. Conclusions Participants wanted to receive information about the benefits of their medicines.However, theymay misinterpret the numerical information provided.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	216-225
Number of pages	10
Journal	The International journal of pharmacy practice
Volume	21
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-7174.2012.00253.x
Publication status	Published - Aug 2012

Access to Document

10.1111/j.2042-7174.2012.00253.x

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2042-7174.2012.00253.x/abstract

Cite this

@article{65bdebeb90334776b52171bdfc1a22df,

title = "It{\textquoteright}s for your benefit: exploring patients{\textquoteright} opinions about the inclusion of textual and numerical benefit information in medicine leaflets",

abstract = "Objectives To explore consumers{\textquoteright} beliefs and preferences for benefit information in medicine leaflets and examine their understanding and reaction to treatment benefits. Methods Forty-five participants were recruited to eight focus groups, run concurrently in Australia (23 participants in four groups) and the UK (22 participants in four groups). Participants were provided with amended leaflets based on the medicine clopidogrel, containing textual and numerical benefit information presented using numbers needed to treat (NNT).A topic guide which explored use of leaflets, preferences and opinions was used to direct discussion. Focus group discussions were recorded, transcribed verbatim and content analysed using adapted cross-case study analysis. Key findings The consensus was that the inclusion of benefit information was a positive factor. Many participants felt that textual benefit information offered an incentive to take a medicine, although some Australian participants had concerns that included benefit information could create anxiety.The presentation of numerical benefit information provoked strong feelings of disbelief and shock. Participants were surprised that so few people would benefit. Some participants struggled to understand and interpret the NNT and others found it difficult to comprehend the magnitude of the benefit information, instead operating on initial and often crude assumptions of what the data meant. In both countries the provision of numerical benefit information appeared to shake participants{\textquoteright} faith in drug treatments.Participants were concerned about how this might affect the {\textquoteleft}less-informed{\textquoteright} patient. However, in the UK, participants stated that their adherence to treatment was also reinforced by their doctor{\textquoteright}s advice. Conclusions Participants wanted to receive information about the benefits of their medicines.However, theymay misinterpret the numerical information provided.",

author = "Kim Hamrosi and Rebecca Dickinson and Peter Knapp and Raynor, {David K.} and Ines Krass and Julie Sowter and Parisa Aslani",

year = "2012",

month = aug,

doi = "10.1111/j.2042-7174.2012.00253.x",

language = "English",

volume = "21",

pages = "216--225",

journal = "The International journal of pharmacy practice",

issn = "0961-7671",

publisher = "Pharmaceutical Press",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - It’s for your benefit

T2 - exploring patients’ opinions about the inclusion of textual and numerical benefit information in medicine leaflets

AU - Hamrosi, Kim

AU - Dickinson, Rebecca

AU - Knapp, Peter

AU - Raynor, David K.

AU - Krass, Ines

AU - Sowter, Julie

AU - Aslani, Parisa

PY - 2012/8

Y1 - 2012/8

N2 - Objectives To explore consumers’ beliefs and preferences for benefit information in medicine leaflets and examine their understanding and reaction to treatment benefits. Methods Forty-five participants were recruited to eight focus groups, run concurrently in Australia (23 participants in four groups) and the UK (22 participants in four groups). Participants were provided with amended leaflets based on the medicine clopidogrel, containing textual and numerical benefit information presented using numbers needed to treat (NNT).A topic guide which explored use of leaflets, preferences and opinions was used to direct discussion. Focus group discussions were recorded, transcribed verbatim and content analysed using adapted cross-case study analysis. Key findings The consensus was that the inclusion of benefit information was a positive factor. Many participants felt that textual benefit information offered an incentive to take a medicine, although some Australian participants had concerns that included benefit information could create anxiety.The presentation of numerical benefit information provoked strong feelings of disbelief and shock. Participants were surprised that so few people would benefit. Some participants struggled to understand and interpret the NNT and others found it difficult to comprehend the magnitude of the benefit information, instead operating on initial and often crude assumptions of what the data meant. In both countries the provision of numerical benefit information appeared to shake participants’ faith in drug treatments.Participants were concerned about how this might affect the ‘less-informed’ patient. However, in the UK, participants stated that their adherence to treatment was also reinforced by their doctor’s advice. Conclusions Participants wanted to receive information about the benefits of their medicines.However, theymay misinterpret the numerical information provided.

AB - Objectives To explore consumers’ beliefs and preferences for benefit information in medicine leaflets and examine their understanding and reaction to treatment benefits. Methods Forty-five participants were recruited to eight focus groups, run concurrently in Australia (23 participants in four groups) and the UK (22 participants in four groups). Participants were provided with amended leaflets based on the medicine clopidogrel, containing textual and numerical benefit information presented using numbers needed to treat (NNT).A topic guide which explored use of leaflets, preferences and opinions was used to direct discussion. Focus group discussions were recorded, transcribed verbatim and content analysed using adapted cross-case study analysis. Key findings The consensus was that the inclusion of benefit information was a positive factor. Many participants felt that textual benefit information offered an incentive to take a medicine, although some Australian participants had concerns that included benefit information could create anxiety.The presentation of numerical benefit information provoked strong feelings of disbelief and shock. Participants were surprised that so few people would benefit. Some participants struggled to understand and interpret the NNT and others found it difficult to comprehend the magnitude of the benefit information, instead operating on initial and often crude assumptions of what the data meant. In both countries the provision of numerical benefit information appeared to shake participants’ faith in drug treatments.Participants were concerned about how this might affect the ‘less-informed’ patient. However, in the UK, participants stated that their adherence to treatment was also reinforced by their doctor’s advice. Conclusions Participants wanted to receive information about the benefits of their medicines.However, theymay misinterpret the numerical information provided.

U2 - 10.1111/j.2042-7174.2012.00253.x

DO - 10.1111/j.2042-7174.2012.00253.x

M3 - Article

SN - 0961-7671

VL - 21

SP - 216

EP - 225

JO - The International journal of pharmacy practice

JF - The International journal of pharmacy practice

IS - 4

ER -