Preference of patient information leaflets over standard drug monographs by patients prescribed hydrochlorothiazide, nifedipine and enalapril.

Standard drug monographs (SDMs) have been described as deficient in providing information in a manner simplified enough for patient reading. The aim of this study was to design patient information leaflets for hydrochlorothiazide, nifedipine and enalapril with content indicated by patients as relevant and to evaluate them against the SDM. Patient information leaflet (PIL) for each drug was designed to contain information on name, use of drug, how it works, how it is to be taken, common side effects, storage, missed dose action, things to avoid and when to contact the physician. Appropriateness was assessed by 10 practising pharmacists. For each drug, 40 patients were recruited, of which 20 were given SDM and 20 PIL. The knowledge of each participant was examined before and after exposure to SDM or PIL, as well as opinion on ease of reading and attractiveness using Pearson s Chi-square analysis. The results showed that both SDM and PIL improved knowledge of common side effects when compared with responses before exposure (chi2 = 24.26 for SDM and 27.64 for PIL, p < 0.001) with no difference between the groups. Respondents receiving PILs were better able to recall "things to avoid" after exposure to PIL (chi2 =10.85, p < 0.001). After exposure to SDM or PIL, the respondents who received PIL were more aware of when to contact the physician, compared to the SDM group (chi2 = 8.41, p < 0.01). When compared with SDM, respondents receiving PIL were more likely to indicate that PIL was easy to read (chi2 = 20.00, p < 0.001), attractive (chi2 = 12.45, p < 0.001) and they were more likely to recommend distribution of their reading material to other patients (chi2 = 22.11, p < 0.001). We conclude that there is benefit in designing information leaflets that simplify language and medication information contained in SDMs, including better understanding of precautions to take while on medication and when to consult physicians.

Preference of patient information leaflets over standard drug monographs by patients prescribed hydrochlorothiazide, nifedipine and enalapril / Preferencia por los prospectos de información al paciente en lugar de las monografías estándar sobre medicamentos, por parte de los pacientes a quienes se les ha prescrito hidroclorotiazida, nifedipina y analapril

Standard drug monographs (SDMs) have been described as deficient in providing information in a manner simplified enough for patient reading. The aim of this study was to design patient information leaflets for hydrochlorothiazide, nifedipine and enalapril with content indicated by patients as relevant and to evaluate them against the SDM. Patient information leaflet (PIL) for each drug was designed to contain information on name, use of drug, how it works, how it is to be taken, common side effects, storage, missed dose action, things to avoid and when to contact the physician. Appropriateness was assessed by 10 practising pharmacists. For each drug, 40 patients were recruited, of which 20 were given SDM and 20 PIL. The knowledge of each participant was examined before and after exposure to SDM or PIL, as well as opinion on ease of reading and attractiveness using Pearson's Chi-square analysis. The results showed that both SDM and PIL improved knowledge of common side effects when compared with responses before exposure (χ² = 24.26for SDM and 27.64 for PIL, p < 0.001) with no difference between the groups. Respondents receiving PILs were better able to recall "things to avoid" after exposure to PIL (χ² =10.85, p < 0.001). After exposure to SDM or PIL, the respondents who received PIL were more aware of when to contact the physician, compared to the SDM group (χ² = 8.41, p < 0.01). When compared with SDM, respondents receiving PIL were more likely to indicate that PIL was easy to read (χ² = 20.00, p < 0.001), attractive (χ² = 12.45, p < 0.001) and they were more likely to recommend distribution of their reading material to other patients (χ² = 22.11, p < 0.001). We conclude that there is benefit in designing information leaflets that simplify language and medication information contained in SDMs, including better understanding of precautions to take while on medication and when to consult physicians.

Las monografías de medicamentos estandarizadas se han considerado deficientes a la hora de proporcionar información de manera suficientemente simple para que el paciente pueda entenderlas. El objetivo de este estudio fue disenar prospectos con información sobre la hidroclorotiazida, la nifedipina y el analapril con contenidos indicados como relevantes por los pacientes, y evaluarlos en comparación con las monografías estandarizadas de medicamentos (MEM). El prospecto de información para el paciente (PIP) fue disenado de modo que apareciera información sobre el nombre del medicamento, su uso, modo de operar, manera de tomarse, efectos secundarios comunes, almacenamiento, qué hacer en caso de perder una dosis, cosas que deben evitarse, y cuando debe contactarse el médico. Se evaluó la adecuación por parte de 10 farmacéuticos practicantes. Para cada medicamento, se reclutaron 40 pacientes, a 20 de los cuales se les dio monografías (MEM), en tanto que a 20 se les ofreció prospectos (PIP). El conocimiento de cada participante se examinó antes y después de la exposición a MEM o PIP, así como la opinión en cuanto a facilidad de lectura y grado de atracción, usando el análisis del Chi-cuadrado de Pearson. Los resultados mostraron que tanto MEM como PIP mejoraron el conocimiento sobre los efectos secundarios comunes, cuando se hacía una comparación con las respuestas antes de la exposición (χ² = 24.26para MEMy 27.64para PIP, p < 0.001) sin diferencia entre los grupos. Los encuestados que recibieron prospectos pudieron recordar mejor las "cosas a evitar" luego de la exposición a PIP (χ² =10.85, p < 0.001). Después de la exposición a MEM o PIP, los encuestados con PIP tenían mayor conciencia en cuanto a cuando contactar a un médico, en comparación con el grupo MEM (χ² = 8.41, p < 0.01). Cuando se les comparó con el grupo MEM, los encuestados que recibieron PIP mostraron por una parte mayor probabilidad de indicar que PIP era más fácil de leer (χ² = 20.00, p < 0.001) y atractivo (χ² = 12.45, p < 0.001), y por otra, una mayor tendencia a recomendar la distribución de su material de lectura a otros pacientes (χ² = 22.11, p < 0.001). Se llegó a la conclusión de que es beneficioso disenar prospectos que simplifiquen el lenguajey la información médica contenida en las monografias estándar del medicamento, incluyendo una mejor comprensión de las precauciones a tomar mientras se está bajo medicación, y sobre cuándo consultar al médico.

Deep seismic reflection results from the gulf of Mexico: part I.

Deep sounding seismic reflection data show undeformed reflectors at depths down to 11 kilometers beneath the continental rise and abyssal plain and 7 kilometers in basins of the lower slope. Weak reflectors are visible beneath the salt of the Sigsbee Scarp and within salt ridges separating the lower slope basins.