Dataset Information

The impact of textual elements on the comprehensibility of drug label instructions (DLIs): A systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Correct interpretation of drug labels instructions (DLIs) is needed for safe use and better adherence to prescribed drugs. DLIs are often too difficult for patients, especially for those with limited health literacy. What is yet unknown, is how specific textual elements in DLIs (e.g., the presentation of numbers, or use of medical jargon) and patients' health literacy skills are related to the comprehension of DLIs. In order to provide concrete directions for health professionals on how to optimize drug prescriptions, we performed a systematic review to summarize the available research findings on which textual elements facilitate or hinder the correct interpretation of DLIs in relation to patients' health literacy.

Method

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, PsychINFO, and Smartcat (until April 2019) to identify studies investigating textual elements that facilitate or hinder the correct interpretation of DLIs in relation to patients' health literacy.

Results

A total of 434 studies were identified of which 28 studies met our inclusion criteria. We found that textual elements contributing to the correct interpretation of DLIs were: using explicit time periods in dosage instructions, using plain language, presenting numbers in a numerical format, and providing DLIs in patients' native language. Multistep instructions per instruction line, using abbreviations and medical jargon seem to hinder the correct interpretation of DLIs. Although health literacy was taken into account in a majority of the studies, none of them assessed the effectiveness of specific textual elements on patients' comprehensibility of DLIs.

Conclusion

Based on our findings, we provide an overview of textual elements that contribute to the correct interpretation of DLIs. Optimizing the textual instruction on drug labels may increase the safety and adherence to prescribed drugs, taking into account that a significant proportion of patients has low health literacy.

SUBMITTER: Maghroudi E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8133485 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ContextParents often manage complex instructions when their children are discharged from the inpatient setting or emergency department (ED); misunderstanding instructions can put children at risk for adverse outcomes. Parents' ability to manage discharge instructions has not been examined before in a systematic review.ObjectiveTo perform a systematic review of the literature related to parental management (knowledge and execution) of inpatient and ED discharge instructions.Data sourcesWe consulted PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane CENTRAL (from database inception to January 1, 2017).Study selectionWe selected experimental or observational studies in the inpatient or ED settings in which parental knowledge or execution of discharge instructions were evaluated.Data extractionTwo authors independently screened potential studies for inclusion and extracted data from eligible articles by using a structured form.ResultsSixty-four studies met inclusion criteria; most (n = 48) were ED studies. Medication dosing and adherence errors were common; knowledge of medication side effects was understudied (n = 1). Parents frequently missed follow-up appointments and misunderstood return precaution instructions. Few researchers conducted studies that assessed management of instructions related to diagnosis (n = 3), restrictions (n = 2), or equipment (n = 1). Complex discharge plans (eg, multiple medicines or appointments), limited English proficiency, and public or no insurance were associated with errors. Few researchers conducted studies that evaluated the role of parent health literacy (ED, n = 5; inpatient, n = 0).LimitationsThe studies were primarily observational in nature.ConclusionsParents frequently make errors related to knowledge and execution of inpatient and ED discharge instructions. Researchers in the future should assess parental management of instructions for domains that are less well studied and focus on the design of interventions to improve discharge plan management.

Project description:ObjectivesTo review the metrics and findings of studies evaluating effects of drug decriminalisation or legal regulation on drug availability, use or related health and social harms globally.DesignSystematic review with narrative synthesis.Data sourcesWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science and six additional databases for publications from 1 January 1970 through 4 October 2018.Inclusion criteriaPeer-reviewed articles or published abstracts in any language with quantitative data on drug availability, use or related health and social harms collected before and after implementation of de jure drug decriminalisation or legal regulation.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts and articles for inclusion. Extraction and quality appraisal (modified Downs and Black checklist) were performed by one reviewer and checked by a second, with discrepancies resolved by a third. We coded study-level outcome measures into metric groupings and categorised the estimated direction of association between the legal change and outcomes of interest.ResultsWe screened 4860 titles and 221 full-texts and included 114 articles. Most (n=104, 91.2%) were from the USA, evaluated cannabis reform (n=109, 95.6%) and focussed on legal regulation (n=96, 84.2%). 224 study outcome measures were categorised into 32 metrics, most commonly prevalence (39.5% of studies), frequency (14.0%) or perceived harmfulness (10.5%) of use of the decriminalised or regulated drug; or use of tobacco, alcohol or other drugs (12.3%). Across all substance use metrics, legal reform was most often not associated with changes in use.ConclusionsStudies evaluating drug decriminalisation and legal regulation are concentrated in the USA and on cannabis legalisation. Despite the range of outcomes potentially impacted by drug law reform, extant research is narrowly focussed, with a particular emphasis on the prevalence of use. Metrics in drug law reform evaluations require improved alignment with relevant health and social outcomes.