Pharmacy Hydroxyurea Education Materials for Patients with Sickle Cell Disease: An Environmental Scan and Assessment of Accuracy
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract BACKGROUND: Hydroxyurea (HU) remains a cornerstone of sickle cell disease (SCD) therapy however its clinical efficacy may be limited by poor patient acceptance and adherence. While barriers to HU use are multifold, patients often relay fears relating to potential side effects of HU as a contributor to drug non-adherence. A common source of information on HU side effects is the patient information handouts (PIHs) that are routinely distributed by pharmacies when dispensing a prescription. We sought to formally evaluate the content and accuracy of HU pharmacy PIHs, including comparison of content with a reference standard PIH developed by the Canadian Haemoglobinopathy Association. METHODS: We obtained a comprehensive list of all accredited pharmacies in Ontario, Canada in 2016 from the Ontario College of Pharmacists (OCP), which totalled 4,150 pharmacies. A representative sample of pharmacies were subsequently contacted by telephone or in-person to obtain pharmacy PIHs on HU. PIHs were assessed according to listed uses of HU, number of inaccurate statements, essential statements based on comparison to the CanHaem reference standard PIH, and reading level (using Flesch-Kincaid and SMOG scales). RESULTS: Six unique HU PIHs were identified, which represented approximately 95% of Ontario pharmacies; PIH A and B were used by 58% and 36.7% of pharmacies, respectively (Table 1). While most of the PIHs listed uses for HU (60% of Ontario pharmacies in total), only 58.3% identified SCD as an indication for drug use. All PIHs contained statements that could be classified as inaccurate and misleading. The number of inaccurate statements ranged from 2-5 per PIH; 95% of distributed PIHs had an average of 4 inaccurate statements per handout. The most frequently encountered inaccuracy related to development of cancer in patients taking HU, namely acute leukemia. Additional inaccuracies included special handling precautions, vaccine inefficacy and overstating the likelihood of developing rare side effects such as, “deadly bleeding problems and infections,” hepatic insufficiency and infertility. On average, pharmacy PIHs included 45% of essential statements present within the reference standard HU patient handout. Missing information themes involved use of HU for management of SCD and specifically, benefits of HU in preventing SCD complications, long term safety data on HU and differentiation between common and uncommon side effects of HU use. The reading level of each pharmacy PIH was also assessed and compared to the grade 6 reading level formally advised for written patient information materials by the National Work Group on Literacy and Health. The average reading level across pharmacy PIHs was 7.85 and 7.83 according to the Flesch Kincaid and SMOG scales, respectively. However, 58% of Ontario pharmacies distributed PIHs with a reading level of 9.2 and 8.2 (Flesch Kincaid and SMOG, respectively) in comparison to the grade 6.2 and 6.7 (Flesch Kincaid and SMOG, respectively) reading level of the CanHaem PIH. CONCLUSION: SCD patients in Ontario who are prescribed HU are likely to receive written information materials from pharmacies that contain inaccurate and misleading statements weighted heavily toward risks of HU therapy and run contrary to published literature. Moreover, the PIHs reviewed in this study contained only 45% of the content deemed necessary for patient education on HU by a panel of experts in SCD. Oftentimes, this information requires a comprehension level beyond that recommended for patients. Through the itemization of written information provided to patients when obtaining their HU prescription, this study identifies a potential gap in the care of SCD patients and an opportunity to improve on the quality of HU PIHs to help patients make well-informed decisions about their health. Download : Download high-res image (107KB) Download : Download full-size image Figure 1 . Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,043 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».