Amir H Zargarzadeh1, Anandi V Law. 1. Department of Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. amirz1962@yahoo.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study measured preference for newly designed prescription labels in comparison with two existing labels from the perspective of patients, pharmacists and physicians, based on three parameters: content, convenience and cosmetic appearance. SETTING: Participants were interviewed at pharmacies (patients) and at professional meetings (physicians and pharmacists) regarding their preference for the labels. METHOD: Two new labels (A and B) were designed using Publisher® Software version 2007 based on literature and results from our previous study. New features focusing on content, convenience and cosmetic appearance (3Cs) included a time table for medication administration, indication of medication and warnings, on a redesigned label. These labels were initially tested on a small sample and then revised. A survey instrument was developed to compare currently used labels and modified labels A and B, on the 3Cs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The preference of three groups of stakeholders (patients, pharmacists and physicians) were measured for newly designed labels in comparison with two existing labels. RESULTS: Complete data obtained with 444 patients, 115 pharmacists and 69 physicians indicated that the median age range of participants was between 51 and 64 years. The patient and physician samples consisted of a higher percentage of women. Pharmacists working in chain pharmacies and family practitioners comprised majority of our sample in professional groups. Mean years of experience in pharmacy and physician groups was 18.2 and 26.8 years, respectively. Most patients (94.4%) in the sample had at least high school education. Majority of patients (82.8%) preferred new labels over existing ones and 55.2% preferred label B on all three parameters. Close to two thirds of pharmacists (76.4%) and physicians (75.3%) preferred new labels with 55.3 and 57.9% preferring label B, respectively. Participants cited all the added modifications as reasons for their preference. CONCLUSION: New prescription labels were favored over existing labels by all stakeholders, for content, convenience and cosmetic appearance. The results may help in making labels more user-friendly and addressing problem areas in labels.
OBJECTIVE: This study measured preference for newly designed prescription labels in comparison with two existing labels from the perspective of patients, pharmacists and physicians, based on three parameters: content, convenience and cosmetic appearance. SETTING:Participants were interviewed at pharmacies (patients) and at professional meetings (physicians and pharmacists) regarding their preference for the labels. METHOD: Two new labels (A and B) were designed using Publisher® Software version 2007 based on literature and results from our previous study. New features focusing on content, convenience and cosmetic appearance (3Cs) included a time table for medication administration, indication of medication and warnings, on a redesigned label. These labels were initially tested on a small sample and then revised. A survey instrument was developed to compare currently used labels and modified labels A and B, on the 3Cs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The preference of three groups of stakeholders (patients, pharmacists and physicians) were measured for newly designed labels in comparison with two existing labels. RESULTS: Complete data obtained with 444 patients, 115 pharmacists and 69 physicians indicated that the median age range of participants was between 51 and 64 years. The patient and physician samples consisted of a higher percentage of women. Pharmacists working in chain pharmacies and family practitioners comprised majority of our sample in professional groups. Mean years of experience in pharmacy and physician groups was 18.2 and 26.8 years, respectively. Most patients (94.4%) in the sample had at least high school education. Majority of patients (82.8%) preferred new labels over existing ones and 55.2% preferred label B on all three parameters. Close to two thirds of pharmacists (76.4%) and physicians (75.3%) preferred new labels with 55.3 and 57.9% preferring label B, respectively. Participants cited all the added modifications as reasons for their preference. CONCLUSION: New prescription labels were favored over existing labels by all stakeholders, for content, convenience and cosmetic appearance. The results may help in making labels more user-friendly and addressing problem areas in labels.
Authors: Peter J Zed; Riyad B Abu-Laban; Robert M Balen; Peter S Loewen; Corinne M Hohl; Jeffrey R Brubacher; Kerry Wilbur; Matthew O Wiens; Leslie J Samoy; Katie Lacaria; Roy A Purssell Journal: CMAJ Date: 2008-06-03 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Terry C Davis; Michael S Wolf; Pat F Bass; Jason A Thompson; Hugh H Tilson; Marolee Neuberger; Ruth M Parker Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2006-11-29 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: P Michael Ho; David J Magid; Susan M Shetterly; Kari L Olson; Thomas M Maddox; Pamela N Peterson; Frederick A Masoudi; John S Rumsfeld Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Terry C Davis; Alex D Federman; Pat F Bass; Robert H Jackson; Mark Middlebrooks; Ruth M Parker; Michael S Wolf Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-11-01 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Michael S Wolf; Terry C Davis; William Shrank; David N Rapp; Pat F Bass; Ulla M Connor; Marla Clayman; Ruth M Parker Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2007-06-22
Authors: Jennifer Webb; Terry C Davis; Pam Bernadella; Marla L Clayman; Ruth M Parker; Deborah Adler; Michael S Wolf Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2008-07-21
Authors: William H Shrank; Patrick P Gleason; Claire Canning; Carol Walters; Alan H Heaton; Saira Jan; Amanda Patrick; M Alan Brookhart; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Daniel H Solomon; Jerry Avorn; Niteesh K Choudhry Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2009-02-27 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Michael S Wolf; Terry C Davis; Laura M Curtis; Stacy Cooper Bailey; JoAnn Pearson Knox; Ashley Bergeron; Mercedes Abbet; William H Shrank; Ruth M Parker; Alastair J J Wood Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2016-08-19 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Seth E Wolpin; Juliet K Nguyen; Jason J Parks; Annie Y Lam; Donald E Morisky; Lara Fernando; Adeline Chu; Donna L Berry Journal: Pharm Pract (Granada) Date: 2016-06-15
Authors: Hsiang-Wen Lin; Elizabeth H Chang; Yu Ko; Chun-Yu Wang; Yu-Shan Wang; Okti Ratna Mafruhah; Shang-Hua Wu; Yu-Chieh Chen; Yen-Ming Huang Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-09-23 Impact factor: 3.390