PILs that give you a headache? The lay-friendliness of non-pharmacy restricted, over-the-counter information leaflets

K. Zethsen
{"title":"PILs that give you a headache? The lay-friendliness of non-pharmacy restricted, over-the-counter information leaflets","authors":"K. Zethsen","doi":"10.7146/qhc.v1i1.124084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Over-the-counter (OTC) medication, and in particular non-pharmacy restricted OTC medicines, sold in supermarkets or online, is subject to the same EU legislation as prescription medication. However, it seems that due care is often not taken to ensure maximum patient comprehension even though the Patient Information Leaflet (PIL) is potentially more important due to lack of access to the advice of pharmacy staff. Aim: The aim of this article is to explore the legislative background and practice of the PILs of non-pharmacy restricted OTC medicines in a European context. Methods: It provides a qualitative textual analysis of Danish PILs for the potentially most dangerous products with a view to finding out to which extent the PILs comply with current legislation and guidelines. Findings: The textual analysis shows that the PILs are far too complex to stand alone as a source of information. Discussion: The article discusses the nature of non-pharmacy restricted OTC medicines, the potential consequences of a lack of understandable patient information, and whether it is in the interest of consumers that these products are available outside the pharmacy. Conclusion: It is recommended that the potentially most harmful non-pharmacy restricted OTC medicines, such as analgesics, are restricted to pharmacies.","PeriodicalId":320293,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Health Communication","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Health Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7146/qhc.v1i1.124084","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Over-the-counter (OTC) medication, and in particular non-pharmacy restricted OTC medicines, sold in supermarkets or online, is subject to the same EU legislation as prescription medication. However, it seems that due care is often not taken to ensure maximum patient comprehension even though the Patient Information Leaflet (PIL) is potentially more important due to lack of access to the advice of pharmacy staff. Aim: The aim of this article is to explore the legislative background and practice of the PILs of non-pharmacy restricted OTC medicines in a European context. Methods: It provides a qualitative textual analysis of Danish PILs for the potentially most dangerous products with a view to finding out to which extent the PILs comply with current legislation and guidelines. Findings: The textual analysis shows that the PILs are far too complex to stand alone as a source of information. Discussion: The article discusses the nature of non-pharmacy restricted OTC medicines, the potential consequences of a lack of understandable patient information, and whether it is in the interest of consumers that these products are available outside the pharmacy. Conclusion: It is recommended that the potentially most harmful non-pharmacy restricted OTC medicines, such as analgesics, are restricted to pharmacies.
让你头痛的药?非药房限制,非处方信息传单的外行人友好
背景:非处方(OTC)药物,特别是在超市或网上销售的非药房限制的OTC药物,与处方药一样受到欧盟立法的约束。然而,似乎往往没有采取应有的注意,以确保最大限度的病人理解,即使病人信息传单(PIL)可能是更重要的,由于缺乏获得药房工作人员的建议。目的:本文的目的是探讨欧洲非药房限制OTC药品的PILs的立法背景和实践。方法:它提供了一个定性的文本分析,对潜在的最危险的产品,以找出在何种程度上符合现行立法和指导方针的丹麦PILs。研究结果:文本分析表明,药品清单过于复杂,不能单独作为信息来源。讨论:本文讨论了非药房限制的OTC药物的性质,缺乏可理解的患者信息的潜在后果,以及这些产品在药店外可获得是否符合消费者的利益。结论:建议对潜在危害最大的非药学限制OTC药品,如镇痛药,应限制在药店使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信