Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Potential negative impact of informing patients about medication side effects: a systematic review

  • Review Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background Pharmacovigilance, as it is carried out primarily by healthcare professionals is more focused on being very objective in nature. Acknowledging the importance of the subjective experience of patients in pharmacovigilance was underpinned by its unique ability to bring about a more holistic understanding through the deep information unraveled by the patients. Medication safety-related information has to be shared with patients to allow them to be actively involved in their therapy and pharmacovigilance. Despite the advantages of sharing information, it stands to reasons whether sharing information related to possible side effects would negatively affect patients and impinge upon their treatment plan and process. Aim of the Review The purpose of this systematic review was to critically assess the potential negative impact of informing patients about medication side effects by written and/or oral information on medication compliance, occurrence/development of suspected side effects and clinical outcomes. Method A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, and Cochrane library to identify potential records between the year 1975 and 2017; then titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened using the inclusion criteria to filter out irrelevant studies. The data extraction, and the results were narratively synthesized and presented in tables. Results A total of 2012 articles were screened for inclusion, 32 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and finally resulting in the inclusion of 17 randomized control studies which met the set criteria. Findings unraveled that the educational intervention did not result in increased occurrence/reporting of side effects in most of the evaluated studies; except 4 studies, and no significant impact on compliance to medications and negative clinical outcome was observed. Apprehension of negative events to medications were observed in two of the four studies which evaluated these parameters. Conclusion The present review did not find enough evidence to support the over concerns on the potential negative impact of sharing of information on the adverse effects to patients, though the influence could manifest as nocebo-effect. The various components and methods employed for this information sharing process can influence the potential impact of this activity. These concerns about the undesirable effects should not deter the active involvement of patients in pharmacovigilance activities. There is a definite need to have more studies in this area, where much of concern still does exist among the various stakeholders of drug safety information.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. World Health Organization. The importance of pharmacovigilance. Safety monitoring of medicinal products. United Kingdom. 2002. http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/pdf/s4893e/s4893e.pdf. Cited 30 Jan 2018.

  2. Monkman H, Kushniruk AW. All consumer medication information is not created equal: implications for medication safety. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2017;234:233–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. World Health Organization. Essential medicines and health products. http://www.who.int/medicines/areas/quality_safety/safety_efficacy/pharmvigi/en/. Cited 30 Jan 2018.

  4. Sottosanti L. Current roles of the patients in pharmacovigilance activities: regulatory perspective. http://congresso.sifweb.org/programma/abs/102.pdf. Cited 30 Jan 2018.

  5. van Hunsel F. The contribution of direct patient reporting to pharmacovigilance. Dissertation on the Internet. Netherlands: University of Groningen. 2011. https://www.lareb.nl/media/3026/2011_4_thesis_patient_reporting.pdf. Cited 30 Jan 2018.

  6. Blenkinsopp A, Wilkie P, Wang M, Routledge PA. Patient reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions: a review of published literature and international experience. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;63(2):148–56.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Aagaard L, Hansen EH. Adverse drug reactions reported by consumers for nervous system medications in Europe 2007 to 2011. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. 2013;13(14):30. https://doi.org/10.1186/2050-6511-14-30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Aagaard L, Nielsen LH, Hansen EH. Consumer reporting of adverse drug reactions: a retrospective analysis of the Danish adverse drug reaction database from 2004 to 2006. Drug Saf. 2009;32(11):1067–74.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Medscape CME/CE. Communicating drug risk to patients. 2008. https://www.medscape.org/viewarticle/581013_2. Cited 19 Jan 2018.

  10. Jarernsiripornkul N, Chaipichit N, Chumworathayi P, Krska J. Management for improving patients’ knowledge and understanding about drug allergy. Pharm Pract (Granada). 2015;13(1):513.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Couvertier-Lebron CE, Dove R, Acevedo SF. What you do not know could hurt you: what women wish their doctors had told them about chemotherapy side effects on memory and response to alcohol. Breast Cancer (Auckl). 2016;10:229–38.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Morris LA, Kanouse DE. Informing patients about drug side effects. J Behav Med. 1982;5(3):363–73.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Glicksman JT, Sherman I, Rotenberg BW. Informed consent when prescribing medication: a randomized controlled trial. Laryngoscope. 2014;124(6):1296–300.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Angunawela II, Mullee MA. Drug information for the mentally ill: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Psychiatry Clin Pract. 1998;2(2):121–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Quaid KA, Faden RR, Vining EP, Freeman JM. Informed consent for a prescription drug: impact of disclosed information on patient understanding and medical outcomes. Patient Educ Couns. 1990;15(3):249–59.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Whitford HS, Olver IN. When expectations predict experience: the influence of psychological factors on chemotherapy toxicities. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2012;43(6):1036–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Barsky AJ, Saintfort R, Rogers MP, Borus JF. Nonspecific medication side effects and the nocebo phenomenon. JAMA. 2002;287(5):622–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):1006–12.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Silvestri A, Galetta P, Cerquetani E, Marazzi G, Patrizi R, Fini M, et al. Report of erectile dysfunction after therapy with beta-blockers is related to patient knowledge of side effects and is reversed by placebo. Eur Heart J. 2003;24(21):1928–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Chaplin R, Kent A. Informing patients about tardive dyskinesia. Controlled trial of patient education. Br J Psychiatry. 1998;172:78–81.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chaplin R, Timehin C. Informing patients about tardive dyskinesia: four-year follow up of a trial of patient education. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2002;36(1):99–103.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kleinman I, Schachter D, Koritar E. Informed consent and tardive dyskinesia. Am J Psychiatry. 1989;146(7):902–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lamb GC, Green SS, Heron J. Can physicians warn patients of potential side effects without fear of causing those side effects? Arch Intern Med. 2015;154(23):2753–6.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Howland JS, Baker MG, Poe T. Does patient education cause side effects? A controlled trial. J Fam Pract. 1990;31(1):62–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Moyano JR, Zambrano SC. The influence of information leaflets on morphine consumption in postoperative patients using patient-controlled analgesia. J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother. 2011;25(4):335–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gibbs S, Waters WE, George CF. Prescription information leaflets: a national survey. J R Soc Med. 1990;83(5):292–7.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Mondaini N, Gontero P, Giubilei G, Lombardi G, Cai T, Gavazzi A, et al. Finasteride 5 mg and sexual side effects: how many of these are related to a nocebo phenomenon? J Sex Med. 2007;4(6):1708–12.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Taddio A, Ito S, Einarson TR, Leeder JS, Koren G. Effect of counseling on maternal reporting of adverse effects in nursing infants exposed to antibiotics through breast milk. Reprod Toxicol. 1995;9(2):153–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Chumbley GM, Ward L, Hall GM, Salmon P. Pre-operative information and patient-controlled analgesia: much ado about nothing. Anaesthesia. 2004;59(4):354–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Cocco G. Erectile dysfunction after therapy with metoprolol: the Hawthorne effect. Cardiology. 2009;112(3):174–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Gibbs S, Waters WE, George CF. The benefits of prescription information leaflets (1). Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1989;27(6):723–39.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Jacobs W, Das E, Schagen SB. Increased cognitive problem reporting after information about chemotherapy-induced cognitive decline: the moderating role of stigma consciousness. Psychol Health. 2017;32(1):78–93.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Vesco D, Toumi M, Faraj F, Razzouk H, Orehek J. Manufacturer’s information insert and subjective theophylline side-effects. Eur Respir J. 1990;3(10):1162–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Al-Saffar N, Desmukh AA, Carter P, Adib SM. Effect of information leaflets and counselling on antidepressant adherence: open randomised controlled trial in a psychiatric hospital in Kuwait. Int J Pharm Pract. 2005;13(2):123–31.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Baker D, Roberts DE, Newcombe RG, Fox KA. Evaluation of drug information for cardiology patients. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1991;31(5):525–31.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Burgers C, Beukeboom CJ, Sparks L, Diepeveen V. How (not) to inform patients about drug use: use and effects of negations in Dutch patient information leaflets. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2015;24(2):137–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Colagiuri B, McGuinness K, Boakes RA, Butow PN. Warning about side effects can increase their occurrence: an experimental model using placebo treatment for sleep difficulty. J Psychopharmacol. 2012;26(12):1540–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Dowse R, Barford K, Browne SH. Simple, illustrated medicines information improves ARV knowledge and patient self-efficacy in limited literacy South African HIV patients. AIDS Care. 2014;26(11):1400–6.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Gossell-Williams M, Bennett O, Dias Y, Foster K, Houston M, Wright K, et al. Preference of patient information leaflets over standard drug monographs by patients prescribed hydrochlorothiazide, nifedipine and enalapril. West Indian Med J. 2012;61(3):271–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Köpke S, Kern S, Ziemssen T, Berghoff M, Kleiter I, Marziniak M, et al. Evidence-based patient information programme in early multiple sclerosis: a randomised controlled trial. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2014;85(4):411–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Macpherson R, Jerrom B, Hughes A. A controlled study of education about drug treatment in schizophrenia. Br J Psychiatry. 1996;168(6):709–17.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Modesto W, Bahamondes MV, Bahamondes L. A randomized clinical trial of the effect of intensive versus non-intensive counselling on discontinuation rates due to bleeding disturbances of three long-acting reversible contraceptives. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(7):1393–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Munetz MR, Roth LH. Informing patients about tardive dyskinesia. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1985;42(9):866–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Quaid KA, Faden RR, Vining EP, Freeman JM. Informed consent for a prescription drug: impact of disclosed information on patient understanding and medical outcomes. Patient Educ Couns. 1990;15(3):249–59.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Rheker J, Winkler A, Doering BK, Rief W. Learning to experience side effects after antidepressant intake—results from a randomized, controlled, double-blind study. Psychopharmacology. 2017;234(3):329–38.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Riese C, Weiß B, Borges U Jr, Beylich A, Dengler R, Hermes-Moll K, et al. Effectiveness of a standardized patient education program on therapy-related side effects and unplanned therapy interruptions in oral cancer therapy: a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Support Care Cancer. 2017;25(11):3475–83.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Schmitz J, Kamping S, Wiegratz J, Müller M, Stork J, Colloca L, et al. Impact of patient information leaflets on pain medication intake behavior: a pilot study. Pain Rep. 2017;2(6):e620.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Walker LM, Hampton AJ, Wassersug RJ, Thomas BC, Robinson JW. Androgen deprivation therapy and maintenance of intimacy: a randomized controlled pilot study of an educational intervention for patients and their partners. Contemp Clin Trials. 2013;34(2):227–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Inácio P, Cavaco A, Airaksinen M. The value of patient reporting to the pharmacovigilance system: a systematic review. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2017;83(2):227–46.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Delany LJ. Patient-centered care as an approach to improving health care in Australia. Aust J Nurs Pract Scholarsh Res. 2018;25(1):119–23.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Charles C, Whelan T, Gafni A. What do we mean by partnership in making decisions about treatment? BMJ. 1999;319(7212):780–2.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Xu F. Informing patients about drug effects using positive suggestion. J Manag Care Pharm. 2008;14(4):395–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care (UK). Medicines adherence: involving patients in decisions about prescribed medicines and supporting adherence. London: Royal College of General Practitioners (UK). Jan 2009. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK55440/. Cited 30 Jan 2018.

  54. Jose J, Chong D, Lynn TS, Jye GE, Jimmy B. A survey on the knowledge, beliefs and behaviour of a general adult population in Malaysia with respect to the adverse effects of medicines. Int J Pharm Pract. 2011;19(4):246–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Russel IF. How to inform patients about side effects of regional anesthesia and analgesia. http://www.finnanest.fi/files/l_russell_2.pdf. Cited 13 Feb 2018.

  56. Brooks H, Sullivan WJ. The importance of patient autonomy at birth. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2002;11(3):196–203.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Carter A, Hall W. Informed consent to opioid agonist maintenance treatment: recommended ethical guidelines. Int J Drug Policy. 2008;19(1):79–89 PubMed PMID: 18077146.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Jose J, Jimmy B, Al-Mamari MN, Al-Hadrami TS, Al-Zadjali HM. Knowledge, beliefs and behaviours regarding the adverse effects of medicines in an Omani population: cross-sectional survey. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J. 2015;15(2):e250–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Faasse K, Petrie KJ. The nocebo effect: patient expectations and medication side effects. Postgrad Med J. 1055;2013(89):540–6.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Wells RE, Kaptchuk TJ. To tell the truth, the whole truth, may do patients harm: the problem of the nocebo effect for informed consent. Am J Bioeth. 2012;12(3):22–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Ziegler DK, Mosier MC, Buenaver M, Okuyemi K. How much information about adverse effects of medication do patients want from physicians? Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:706–13.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Nair K, Dolovich L, Cassels A, McCormack J, Levine M, Gray J, et al. What patients want to know about their medications: focus group study of patient and clinician perspectives. Can Fam Physician. 2002;48:104–10.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. General Medical Council. Good practice in prescribing and managing medicines and devices. London. 2013. https://www.gmc-uk.org/Prescribing_guidance.pdf_59055247.pdf. Cited 18 Feb 2018.

  64. Horne R, Weinman J, Hankins M. The beliefs about medicines questionnaire: the development and evaluation of a new method for assessing the cognitive representation of medication. Psychol Health. 1999;14:1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Horne R, Faasse K, Cooper V, Diefenbach MA, Leventhal H, Leventhal E, et al. The perceived sensitivity to medicines (PSM) scale: an evaluation of validity and reliability. Br J Health Psychol. 2013;18:18–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Slovic P, Kraus NN, Lappe H, Letzel H, Malmfors T. Risk perception of prescription drugs: report on a survey in Sweden. In: Horisberger B, Dinkel R, editors. The perception and management of drug safety risks. Health systems research. Berlin: Springer; 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Diaz JA, Griffith RA, Ng JJ, Reinert SE, Friedmann PD, Moulton AW. Patients’ use of the Internet for medical information. J Gen Intern Med. 2002;17(3):180–5.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Eriksson R, Aagaard L, Jensen LJ, Borisova L, Hørlück D, Brunak S, et al. Discrepancies in listed adverse drug reactions in pharmaceutical product information supplied by the regulatory authorities in Denmark and the USA. Pharmacol Res Perspect. 2014;2(3):e00038. https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.38.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Peters E, Hart PS, Tusler M, Fraenkel L. Numbers matter to informed patient choices: a randomized design across age and numeracy levels. Med Decis Making. 2014;34(4):430–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Peters E, Hart PS, Fraenkel L. Informing patients: the influence of numeracy, framing, and format of side effect information on risk perceptions. Med Decis Making. 2011;31(3):432–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. McCormack L, Craig Lefebvre R, Bann C, Taylor O, Rausch P. Consumer understanding, preferences, and responses to different versions of drug safety messages in the united states: a randomized controlled trial. Drug Saf. 2016;39(2):171–84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Herber OR, Gies V, Schwappach D, Thürmann P, Wilm S. Patient information leaflets: informing or frightening? A focus group study exploring patients’ emotional reactions and subsequent behavior towards package leaflets of commonly prescribed medications in family practices. BMC Fam Pract. 2014;15:163.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Mitsikostas DD, Chalarakis NG, Mantonakis LI, Delicha EM, Sfikakis PP. Nocebo in fibromyalgia: meta-analysis of placebo-controlled clinical trials and implications for practice. Eur J Neurol. 2012;19(5):672–80.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Rojas-Mirquez JC, Rodriguez-Zuñiga MJ, Bonilla-Escobar FJ, Garcia-Perdomo HA, Petkov M, Becerra L, et al. Nocebo effect in randomized clinical trials of antidepressants in children and adolescents: systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Behav Neurosci. 2014;8:375.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. Stuart K. 25 reasons people aren’t enrolling in your clinical trial. Oct 2015. http://www.imperialcrs.com/blog/2015/10/25-reasons-people-arent-enrolling-in-your-clinical-trial/. Cited 17 Feb 2018.

  76. Comprehensive Cancer Centres of Nevada. Common misconceptions about clinical research. https://www.cccnevada.com/clinical-research-misconceptions/. Cited 17 Feb 2018.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors would like to acknowledge the contribution of Hisn A’Shumookh library, Sultanate of Oman and Dr. James Stevenson, College of Pharmacy, University of Michigan in facilitating the access of many full text articles included in the review.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Conflicts of interest

Jimmy Jose and Lamia AlHajri declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Pharmacy, University of Nizwa, Birkat Al Mouz, P.O. Box 33, 616, Nizwa, Sultanate of Oman

    Jimmy Jose

  2. Health Sciences Division, Higher College of Technology, P.O. Box 16062, Dubai, United Arab Emirates

    Lamia AlHajri

  3. Department of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK

    Lamia AlHajri

Authors
  1. Jimmy Jose
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lamia AlHajri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jimmy Jose.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jose, J., AlHajri, L. Potential negative impact of informing patients about medication side effects: a systematic review. Int J Clin Pharm 40, 806–822 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-018-0716-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-018-0716-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation