Healthy Skepticism Library item: 10057

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: Journal Article

Narhi U.
Sources of medicine information and their reliability evaluated by medicine users.
Pharm World Sci 2007 May 4;
http://www.springerlink.com/content/p321g7l375k73152/

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: To study the medicine users’ sources of medicine information and the perceived reliability of these sources in different age groups.

SETTING: A computer-aided telephone interview (CATI) to Finnish consumers (n = 1,004). Those respondents (n = 714) who reported using any prescription or self-medication medicines more than once a month were included in the study.

METHOD: The respondents were interviewed about their use of sources of medicine information during the previous 6 months. The reliability of sources in different age groups was estimated using a 4-point scale: very reliable, somewhat reliable, somewhat unreliable and very unreliable. The respondents also had the option of being unable to make an appraisal.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: A proportion of respondents reporting using the source, number of mentioned sources and their reliability evaluated by respondents.

RESULTS: About half of the respondents in each age group mentioned two to four sources. The most common sources of information were Patient Information Leaflets (PILs) (74%), doctors (68%) and pharmacists (60%). Next came television (40%), newspapers and magazines (40%), drug advertisements (32%), nurses (28%), drug information leaflets (27%), relatives and friends (24%), medicine guides and books (22%) and the Internet (20%). There was a significant difference between age groups in reporting the Internet as a source of medicine information (15-34-year-old respondents reported the greatest Internet use). The three most reliable sources in every age group were reported to be PILs, doctors and pharmacists. Nurses, drug regulatory authorities, drug information leaflets and medicine guides and books were considered next most reliable. Relatives and friends, television, newspapers and magazines were considered the least reliable. The respondents were most uncertain about the reliability of the Internet, patient organisations and telephone services. There was a significant difference between age groups in evaluating the reliability of telephone services (15-34-year-olds found them more reliable).

CONCLUSION: Medicine users reported receiving medicine information from many sources. The most commonly used sources were perceived as the most reliable, but their reliability did not seem to depend on age. The counsellors should take into account that patients have many sources of medicine information, with varying validity.