Does consumer medicines interest reflect medicines use? An observational study comparing medicines call center queries with medicines use

Long term impact of the WHI studies on information-seeking and decision-making in menopause symptoms management: a longitudinal analysis of questions to a medicines call centre

BACKGROUND

While women are taking a greater role in decisions about menopause symptom management, the legacy of the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) studies persist. Despite hormone therapy (HT) being effective in reducing all-cause mortality, many women seeking relief of menopausal symptoms exaggerate HT harms and overstate the perceived benefits or ignore the risks of alternative therapies. We aimed to explore the longitudinal impact of the widely-publicised WHI 2002 study on women's information-seeking and describe determinants of decision-making about managing menopausal symptoms.

METHODS

In a longitudinal analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data, we explored consumer questions about menopause-related medicines received by two Australian medicines call centres (1996-2010) before, during, and after WHI 2002. We analysed calls by age and gender of caller and patient, their relationship, postcode, enquiry type, and motivation to help-seek. We compared calls regarding HT and herbal medicines (HM) with the rest of calls, and thematically analysed question narratives across the three time-periods.

RESULTS

There were 1,829 menopause-related calls received of over this time-period, with a call surge, primarily from women in their mid-fifties, in the two months after the WHI 2002 publication. Two in three calls were motivated by negative media reports as women sought support for decision-making, primarily reassurance to cease HT. While HT safety concerns persisted for eight years post-publication, the nature of information-seeking changed over time. Callers subsequently sought reassurance to use menopause treatments together with their other medicines; and pursued HT substitutes, including HM, in response to HT product discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

Women sought information or reassurance to support a decision, based on dynamic changes in internal (symptom or risk intolerance, attitude towards menopause and treatment preferences) and external factors (perceived source trust and changes in treatment availability). In assessing HT benefit versus risk, women tend to overestimate risk with HT safety concerns persisting over time. Decision-making in managing menopause symptoms is complex and dynamic. Reassurance to reach or justify decisions from a perceived trusted source can support informed decision-making.

Real-world questions and concerns about disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs): a retrospective analysis of questions to a medicine call center

Background

Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have transformed the treatment of numerous autoimmune and inflammatory diseases but their perceived risk of harm may be a barrier to use.

Methods

In a retrospective mixed-methods study, we analysed conventional (c) and biologic (b) DMARDs-related calls and compared them with rest of calls (ROC) from consumers to an Australian national medicine call center operated by clinical pharmacists from September 2002 to June 2010. This includes the period where bDMARDs became available on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, the government-subsidized prescription medicines formulary. We compared caller and patient demographics, enquiry types and motivation to information-seek for both cDMARDs and bDMARDs with ROC, using a t-test for continuous data and a chi-square test for categorical data. We explored call narratives to identify common themes.

Results

There were 1547 calls involving at least one DMARD. The top three cDMARD enquiry types were side effects (27.2%), interactions (21.9%), and risk versus benefit (11.7%). For bDMARDs, the most common queries involved availability and subsidized access (18%), mechanism and profile (15.8%), and side effects (15.1%). The main consumer motivations to information-seek were largely independent of medicines type and included: inadequate information (44%), wanting a second opinion (23.6%), concern about a worrying symptom (18.8%), conflicting information (6.9%), or information overload (2.3%). Question themes common to conventional and biological DMARDs were caller overemphasis on medication risk and the need for reassurance. Callers seeking information about bDMARDs generally overestimated effectiveness and focused their attention on availability, cost, storage, and medicine handling.

Conclusion

Consumers have considerable uncertainty regarding DMARDs and may overemphasise risk. Patients cautiously assess the benefits and risks of their DMARDs but when new treatments emerge, they tend to overestimate their effectiveness.

Withdrawal and Misuse Concerns of Consumers regarding Opioid Analgesic and Anxiolytic, Hypnotic and Sedative Medicines

Opioid analgesic (OA) and anxiolytic, hypnotic and sedative (AHS) medicines use raise community concerns about risks of dependence: dose escalation, unintentional misuse. Objectives: We aimed to identify common consumer OA and AHS information gaps and concerns that led to information seeking from a hotline. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, mixed-method observational study of consumers' OA and AHS-related calls to an Australian national medicines call center (September 2002-30 June 2010). We analyzed these medicines' call characteristics compared to their respective rest of calls (ROC) and thematically explored narratives concerning withdrawal and misuse. Results: Of 123,217 calls, 7,395 (6.0%) involved OA and 7,789 (6.2%) AHS, with consistency between call characteristics. While female middle-aged callers predominated, more males called for these medicines than their complementary ROC. Uncertainty about unresolved OA and AHS concerns led to help-seeking that was consistent over eight years. Main motivations were inadequate information (OA 44.5%; AHS 41.2%), seeking a second opinion (OA 24.2%; AHS 24.2%), worrying symptoms (OA 21.6%; AHS 23.1%), and conflicting information (OA 4.9%; AHS 5.1%). Callers focused on withdrawal and issues related to inadvertent overuse or deliberate misuse (OA 9.2% vs. non-OA ROC 2.9%; AHS 12.6% vs. non-AHS ROC 2.7%). Primary themes were similar for both cohorts: concern about harm or aiming to minimize harm by information seeking, requesting a strategy, or reassurance. Conclusions: Consumers have under-recognized perceptions of harm from OA and AHS use, particularly withdrawal and misuse. Resources based on real world consumer concerns can encourage open dialogue between patients and their prescribers.