Impact of a drug bulletin on the knowledge, perception of drug utility, and prescribing behavior of physicians. Can computer-generated evidence-based care suggestions enhance evidence-based management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease? A randomized, controlled trial. Improving informed consent to chemotherapy: a randomized controlled trial of written information versus an interactive multimedia CD-ROM. Randomized trial of psychotropic medication information leaflets for people with intellectual disability. Do undereducated patients read and understand written education materials? A pilot study in Isparta, Turkey. Effectiveness of a printed leaflet for enabling patients to use digoxin side-effect information. Internet-based health information consumer skills intervention for people living with HIV/AIDS. Effect of periodic letters on evidence-based drug therapy on prescribing behaviour: a randomized trial. The impact of a drug information sheet on the understanding and attitude of patients about drugs.
The impact of a drug bulletin was tested in a randomized controlled trial that included 186 family physicians. The length of the trial was six months. It was hypothesized that printed information, such as in drug bulletins, influences physician prescribing behavior by changing their knowledge of drug efficacy and adverse effects and their perceptions of drug utility. Therefore, the impact of a drug bulletin was evaluated on these domains of influence. Interview data were used to assess changes in knowledge, perceived drug utility, and stated prescribing. Health insurance funds' records were used to collect actual prescribing data. Information in the bulletin on the treatment of renal colic changed physicians' knowledge as well as perceived utility of drugs used for renal colic (p less than 0.05). Significant changes in stated prescribing were also found. On the other hand, advice in the same bulletin on the treatment of the irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) had no impact at all. It did not even improve the knowledge of the physicians about the drugs used for IBS. Apparently, the message about the treatment of IBS failed to gain the attention of the physicians. It is suggested that some messages are sufficiently transmitted through written information, and others that are seen as less relevant or too difficult to implement need more intensive strategies. Translation of evidence-based guidelines into clinical practice has been inconsistent. We performed a randomized, controlled trial of guideline-based care suggestions delivered to physicians when writing orders on computer workstations.
                Inner-city academic general internal medicine practice.
                Randomized, controlled trial of 246 physicians (25 percent faculty general internists, 75 percent internal medicine residents) and 20 outpatient pharmacists. We enrolled 706 of their primary care patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Care suggestions concerning drugs and monitoring were delivered to a random half of the physicians and pharmacists when writing orders or filling prescriptions using computer workstations. A 2 x 2 factorial randomization of practice sessions and pharmacists resulted in four groups of patients: physician intervention, pharmacist intervention, both interventions, and controls. DATA EXTRACTION/COLLECTION METHODS: Adherence to the guidelines and clinical activity was assessed using patients' electronic medical records. Health-related quality of life, medication adherence, and satisfaction with care were assessed using telephone questionnaires.
                During their year in the study, patients made an average of five scheduled primary care visits. There were no differences between groups in adherence to the care suggestions, generic or condition-specific quality of life, satisfaction with physicians or pharmacists, medication compliance, emergency department visits, or hospitalizations. Physicians receiving the intervention had significantly higher total health care costs. Physician attitudes toward guidelines were mixed.
                Care suggestions shown to physicians and pharmacists on computer workstations had no effect on the delivery or outcomes of care for patients with reactive airways disease. This randomized controlled trial aimed to determine whether an interactive CD-ROM improved cancer patients' recall of chemotherapy treatment information over standard written information, and whether demographic, cognitive, and psychological factors better predicted recall than this format of delivery.
                One-hundred-and-one new patients about to commence chemotherapy were randomized to receive written information or a CD-ROM containing treatment information before giving informed consent. Patients' recall, concentration, short-term memory, reading comprehension, anxiety, depression, and coping styles were assessed with standardized measures pre-treatment. Seventy-seven patients completed tests for recall of treatment information before their second chemotherapy session.
                Intention-to-treat analyses indicated no significant differences between the written information and CD-ROM groups across recall questions about number of drugs received (p=.43), treatment length (p=.23), and treatment goal (p=.69). Binary logistic regressions indicated that for groups combined different variables predicted each of the recall questions.
                An interactive CD-ROM did not improve cancer patients' recall of treatment information enough to warrant changes in consent procedures.
                Different variables predicted recall of different treatment aspects highlighting the complex nature of attempting to improve patient recall. Attending to the effect of depression on patient knowledge and understanding appears paramount. People with intellectual disability (ID), like other patient groups, are known to have a limited knowledge of medication. Leaflets are seen as an appropriate means of providing patient information. To test the hypothesis that medication information leaflets would improve the knowledge and care of the target group, the present authors designed a randomized trial and planned to do subgroup analyses where appropriate. The participants were individually randomized to two groups. A control group was given verbal medication information by their nurse or psychiatrist, and a study group was given specifically designed leaflets in addition to verbal information. The present authors recruited 54 people with mild to moderate ID and mental illness, aged 18 years and older, who were taking psychiatric medications. Questionnaires administered by a blind interviewer recorded outcomes such as medication knowledge and satisfaction at two time points. The participants with mild ID in the leaflet group had significantly reduced medication knowledge and understanding. There were no significant differences in satisfaction with clinicians and medication. Patient information leaflets may confuse people with mild ID in the short term. Other patient groups with cognitive deficits may have similar outcomes. Evaluation of outcomes of health education initiatives is important. The aim of our study is to evaluate the effect of written information in improving the knowledge of the undereducated nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) users about the side effects of NSAIDs and to investigate the compliance of patients with the written information materials.
                Thirty patients received only verbal information, 38 patients received only written, and 40 patients received both verbal and written information. After seven or ten days a questionnaire was administered to the patients on the phone to assess the patients' knowledge.
                Sixty one (78.2%) patients read the leaflets. Higher number of correct answers was obtained with both verbal and written information. Written information better informed than verbal information alone (p=0.02).
                We conclude that the undereducated patients will read and understand written education materials especially when the materials are written simple and short. The effectiveness of a printed leaflet designed to inform patients about digoxin was evaluated. The printed leaflet alone was compared to the verbal consultation alone and the verbal consultation in addition to the printed leaflet. The study assessed patients' decisions about the appropriate course of action to take if side-effect symptoms occurred. Patients receiving the printed leaflet alone scored higher than patients receiving the verbal consultation; however, they scored lower than patients receiving both the printed leaflet and verbal consultation together. Patients receiving both verbal and printed information scored significantly higher than those receiving verbal consultation only. The findings suggest that printed materials together with verbal consultation are essential for enabling patients to make appropriate decisions with respect to side effects. There is not enough evidence to support the use of printed materials in place of verbal consultation. Health practitioners should use printed materials as an adjunct to verbal information. Medical information can improve health, and there is an enormous amount of health information available on the Internet. A randomized clinical trial tested the effectiveness of an intervention based on social- cognitive theory to improve information use among people living with HIV/AIDS. Men and women (N = 448) were placed in either (a) an 8-session intervention that focused on Internet information consumer skills or (b) a time-matched support group and were followed to 9 months postintervention. The Internet skills group demonstrated greater Internet use for health, information coping, and social support compared with the control group. The authors conclude that people with HIV infection may benefit from increased access to health information on the Internet and that vulnerability to misinformation and fraud can be reduced through behavioral interventions.
                Copyright 2006 APA, all rights reserved. The effect of regular and expected printed educational materials on physician prescribing behaviour has not been studied. We sought to measure the impact of a series of evidence-based drug therapy letters mailed to physicians in British Columbia on prescribing to newly treated patients.
                A paired, cluster randomized community design was used. The study population included 499 physicians from 24 local health areas in British Columbia. Local health areas were paired by number of physicians, and 1 of each pair was randomly selected and its physicians assigned to an intervention group or a control group. The intervention was 12 issues of an evidence-based series called Therapeutics Letter. Physicians in the control group (n = 241) received the letters 3-8 months after physicians in the intervention group (n = 258). The impact on prescribing to newly treated patients (defined as patients who had not previously made a claim for any medication from the class of drugs profiled in the letter) was analyzed using the drug claims database of BC Pharmacare, a publicly funded drug benefits program that covered all seniors and people receiving social assistance.
                The probability of prescribing a drug recommended in the Therapeutics Letter rather than another drug in the same class increased by 30% in the 3 months after the mailing of the letter relative to the preceding 3 months, adjusted for any before-after changes in the control group (relative risk 1.30; 95% confidence interval 1.13-1.52). No letter achieved statistical significance on its own. However, 11 of the 12 letters produced prescribing changes in the predicted direction such that the overall result was significant when their effect was combined.
                The combined effect of an ongoing series of printed letters distributed from a credible and trusted source can have a clinically significant effect on prescribing to newly treated patients. A proposed Food and Drug Administration program to require written information with prescription drugs could cost $500 million annually; the American Medical Association has implemented a similar, voluntary program costing more than $3 million. However, the educational impact of written drug information has not been studied. We evaluated one-page drug information sheets using an objective examination. The baseline score of 71 patients was 3.9 of 6.0. Patients tested before and one day after receiving the drug sheet improved their score by +1.4. In the second phase, patients randomized to receive the drug sheet improved their score after one month by +1.1; those not given the sheet had no improvement. Changes in attitudes and incidence of reported adverse effects seemed to be random and unrelated to the information sheet. Thus, a drug information sheet may be a useful adjunct to patient education.
The combined evidence was not strong enough to say whether written medicines information is effective in changing knowledge, attitudes and behaviours related to medicine taking. There is some evidence that written information can improve knowledge. The trials were generally of poor quality, which reduces confidence in the results. Trials examining the effects of written information need to be better designed and use consistent and validated outcome measures. Trials should evaluate internet-based medicines information. It is imperative that written medicines information be based on best practice for its information design and content, which could improve its effectiveness in helping people to use medicines appropriately.