OBJECTIVES: In May 2001, we surveyed French rheumatologists to determine how they inform their patients about serious side effects of drugs. RESULTS: Of the 600 rheumatologists invited to participate in the study, 341 completed and returned the questionnaire. Most respondents believed that full information on patients would become the rule (mean, 62.1 +/- 28.3, the items being scored on a 100-point scale where 0 was "not at all" and 100 "absolutely"). The answer to this item varied little across age groups. Respondents felt that patient information fell primarily on the physician, (78 +/- 23), followed by pharmaceutical companies (64 +/- 32) and pharmacists (46 +/- 33). The respondents believed that full information of patients about side effects would primarily benefit physicians (51 +/- 32), followed by pharmaceutical companies (43 +/- 30) and patients (38 +/- 28). The reaction of patients to information on drug-related risks was described as "always favorable" by 2% of the respondents and as "fairly often favorable" by 55%. Among respondents, 9% always gave information on serious side effects, 66% fairly often, and 4% never; 2% always communicated information on the approximate frequency of serious adverse events, 21% fairly often, and 33% never. Similarly, 3% of the respondents always warned their patients of lethal risks, 11% fairly often, and 44% never. When evaluated on a 100-point scale (0, not at all knowledgeable; 100, very knowledgeable), knowledge of serious side effects of drugs for musculoskeletal conditions was 73 +/- 23, whereas knowledge of the frequency of these effects was only 52 +/- 22. Eight percent of the respondents always recommended that patients read the package insert, 27% fairly often, and 32% never. Conversely, the possible adverse effects of not taking the treatment were always specified by 21% of the respondents and fairly often by 88%.
OBJECTIVES: In May 2001, we surveyed French rheumatologists to determine how they inform their patients about serious side effects of drugs. RESULTS: Of the 600 rheumatologists invited to participate in the study, 341 completed and returned the questionnaire. Most respondents believed that full information on patients would become the rule (mean, 62.1 +/- 28.3, the items being scored on a 100-point scale where 0 was "not at all" and 100 "absolutely"). The answer to this item varied little across age groups. Respondents felt that patient information fell primarily on the physician, (78 +/- 23), followed by pharmaceutical companies (64 +/- 32) and pharmacists (46 +/- 33). The respondents believed that full information of patients about side effects would primarily benefit physicians (51 +/- 32), followed by pharmaceutical companies (43 +/- 30) and patients (38 +/- 28). The reaction of patients to information on drug-related risks was described as "always favorable" by 2% of the respondents and as "fairly often favorable" by 55%. Among respondents, 9% always gave information on serious side effects, 66% fairly often, and 4% never; 2% always communicated information on the approximate frequency of serious adverse events, 21% fairly often, and 33% never. Similarly, 3% of the respondents always warned their patients of lethal risks, 11% fairly often, and 44% never. When evaluated on a 100-point scale (0, not at all knowledgeable; 100, very knowledgeable), knowledge of serious side effects of drugs for musculoskeletal conditions was 73 +/- 23, whereas knowledge of the frequency of these effects was only 52 +/- 22. Eight percent of the respondents always recommended that patients read the package insert, 27% fairly often, and 32% never. Conversely, the possible adverse effects of not taking the treatment were always specified by 21% of the respondents and fairly often by 88%.