Implementation of an animated medication information tool in community pharmacies, with a special focus on patients with limited health literacy

OBJECTIVES

The animated medication information tool 'Watchyourmeds' provides information in an accessible manner through animated videos and therefore appears to be especially suitable for people with limited health literacy. This study aimed to assess the implementation of this animated medication information tool in Dutch community pharmacies, with a special focus on patients with limited health literacy.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey based on the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework was sent to approximately 75% of the ±1900 community pharmacies in the Netherlands through email newsletters of pharmacy networks.

KEY FINDINGS

140 pharmacists (⁓10%) completed the survey and 125 of them (89%) indicated that they offered the animated medication information tool to their patients. 108 pharmacists indicated that the tool was offered to all patients, not only to patients with limited health literacy. The distribution method was primarily passive (patients were given a leaflet and were not explicitly pointed to or informed about the tool). Two frequently cited motivations for offering the tool were that it complemented other sources of information and that the health insurer provided a financial incentive. The main reasons patients refused to use the tool were that they had no access to or no affinity for the required technology.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that the tool is used in community pharmacies and that it is offered to all patients, regardless of their presumed health literacy level. A more active method of offering the tool may be warranted to better reach patients with limited health literacy.

How does scientific information reach the consumer? A case study among students into providing verbal information on dietary supplements at point of purchase

Consumers of dietary supplements should be made aware of the benefits and risks of these products. This case study therefore aimed to identify the content of the risk-benefit information provided during the purchase of St. John's wort supplements and how consumers perceive this information. Fifteen participants visited a shop to purchase St. John's wort supplements after which they were interviewed on the provided information during the visit. This case study shows that the spontaneous information provision is not consistent in Dutch drugstores and health food shops. The provided information was either very detailed, or no information was given at all. The perceived reliability of information was mainly determined by the authority of the employee and the type of shop where the product was purchased. Information consistency at the moment of purchase is of influence in the perceived value of it.

Pharmacy-Based Approach to Improving Heart Failure Medication Use by Older Adults with Limited Health Literacy: Learning from Interdisciplinary Experience

Heart failure is a chronic disease requiring careful attention to self-care. Patients must follow instructions for diet and medication use to prevent or delay a decline in functional status, quality of life, and expensive care. However, there is considerable heterogeneity in heart failure patients' knowledge of important care routines, their cognition, and their health literacy, which predict the ability to implement self-care. Our interdisciplinary team of cognitive scientists with health literacy expertise, pharmacists, and physicians spent 18 years designing and testing protocols and materials to assist ambulatory heart failure patients with their care. Our approach is theory- as well as problem-driven, guided by our process-knowledge model of health literacy as it relates to self-care among older adult outpatients with either heart failure or hypertension. We used what we had learned from this model to develop a pharmacy-based protocol and tailored patient instruction materials that were the central component of a randomized clinical trial. Our results showed improved adherence to cardiovascular medications, improved health outcomes and patient satisfaction, and direct cost reductions. These results demonstrate the value of our interdisciplinary efforts for developing strategies to improve instruction and communication with attention to health literacy, which are core components of pharmacy and other ambulatory healthcare services. We believe attention to health literacy with medication use will result in improved health outcomes for older adult patients with heart failure and other complex chronic diseases.

Recognizing and Addressing Limited PHarmaceutical literacy: Development of the RALPH interview guide

BACKGROUND

In the context of medication use, pharmaceutical literacy skills are crucial for appropriate and safe use of medication. Recognition of patients with inadequate pharmaceutical literacy in daily pharmacy practice is difficult. No instrument is yet available to support pharmacists herein. The aim of this study was therefore to develop an interview guide for pharmacists to Recognize and Address Limited PHarmaceutical literacy (RALPH).

METHODS

The RALPH interview guide was constructed in three phases: (1) development including a literature search, expert group discussion, and feasibility test with 15 patients; (2) pilot-test with 421 patients throughout 30 community pharmacies, and (3) final test with 508 patients to optimize the interview guide.

RESULTS

The development phase resulted in a first interview guide comprising 15 questions: seven in the functional domain (understanding instructions), four in the communicative domain (finding and understanding medication information) and four in the critical domain (critically analyzing medication information). This version was pilot-tested in 30 pharmacies, with 147 patients during medication reviews and another 274 patients were interviewed while waiting to collect their medication. This test phase led to removal of questions that proved difficult to interpret and to rephrasing some questions. The second version including 11 questions was tested by 109 pharmacists trainees with 508 patients, resulting in the final RALPH interview guide comprising 10 questions, all directly linked to the patient's own medication: three in the functional, three in the communicative and four in the critical domain. Besides instructions on how to use the interview guide, recommendations are provided for pharmacists on how to support patients with limited pharmaceutical literacy skills.

CONCLUSIONS

The practice-based RALPH interview guide supports pharmacists in recognizing patients with limited pharmaceutical literacy. With this insight, pharmacists can tailor their medication counseling to patients' pharmaceutical literacy level to better support patients in their medication use.

Recognizing pharmaceutical illiteracy in community pharmacy: Agreement between a practice-based interview guide and questionnaire based assessment

BACKGROUND

Patients with limited pharmaceutical literacy are at increased risk of drug-related problems. Recognizing these patients in daily practice is difficult. The Recognition and Addressing of Limited Pharmaceutical Literacy (RALPH) interview guide was developed as practical set of questions to recognize patients with limited pharmaceutical literacy in daily pharmacy practice.

OBJECTIVE

To compare agreement between pharmaceutical literacy measured with the RALPH guide and a validated general health literacy questionnaire. In addition, we provide insight into patients' pharmaceutical literacy using the RALPH interview guide.

METHODS

Structured face-to-face interviews with patients who visited a community pharmacy to fill a prescription for themselves were conducted. The interview included the RALPH guide as well as the Functional Communicative Critical Health Literacy (FCCHL) questionnaire to measure general health literacy. Functional, communicative and critical skills were measured and agreement between two methods was calculated.

RESULTS

Data were collected from 508 patients. Patients with limited pharmaceutical literacy, indicated by the RALPH questions, also had a lower general health literacy level according to FCCHL scores. Agreement between the RALPH guide and FCCHL questionnaire was moderate (∼60%) for the three health literacy domains. Most patients (>90%) had correct understanding of frequency and timing of medication use, but 25% did not understand warnings or precautions correctly. Finding understandable information (39%), assessing information applicability (50%) and reliability (64%) were mentioned as difficult by patients.

CONCLUSION

Patients experienced difficulties with more complex skills, e.g. interpretation of warnings or precautions when using a medicine, finding and analyzing medication information. Whereas the FCCHL questionnaire is useful to assess general health literacy, the RALPH interview guide provides insight in the level of skills needed for good medication use and is more suitable for use in a medication specific context such as community pharmacy. Context specific assessment of skills is important to provide tailored pharmaceutical care.