Replacing vaccine paper package inserts: a multi-country questionnaire study on the acceptability of an electronic replacement in different target groups.
Culturally appropriate technology
Leaflet
Parents
Patient health questionnaire
Pregnancy
Vaccine
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 01 2022
24 01 2022
Historique:
received:
23
06
2021
accepted:
04
01
2022
entrez:
25
1
2022
pubmed:
26
1
2022
medline:
1
2
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In the European Union it is mandatory to include paper package leaflets (PPL) with all medicines, including vaccines, to inform the recipient. However, it is difficult to meet the necessity for localized PPLs in each of the 24 official European languages. Replacing PPLs with electronic versions offers many advantages including redistribution across nations, reduced storage space, accessibility by the visually impaired, easily updated information or the addition of video content. We wanted to assess the attitudes of patients (vaccine recipients or their parents) to the potential of replacing PPL with electronic versions. We surveyed vaccinees or their parents in four European countries-Belgium, Italy, Bulgaria and France-for their actual use of vaccine PPLs and their opinions about switching to an electronic package leaflet. Our survey was conducted online because of the COVID-19 pandemic and resulted in 2518 responses to a questionnaire targeted at three specific groups with particular information needs: parents of young children, pregnant women and the elderly (≥ 60 years). Our main findings are that currently vaccine PPLs are rarely used and frequently unavailable for the vaccinee. Across the four countries surveyed 55-82% of vaccinees would accept an electronic version, as did 64% when there was an option to request a printout of the leaflet. We found that switching to electronic versions of vaccine PPLs is an acceptable alternative for the public, potentially increasing the quality and amount of information reaching vaccinees while eliminating some barriers to redistribution of vaccines between countries.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
In the European Union it is mandatory to include paper package leaflets (PPL) with all medicines, including vaccines, to inform the recipient. However, it is difficult to meet the necessity for localized PPLs in each of the 24 official European languages. Replacing PPLs with electronic versions offers many advantages including redistribution across nations, reduced storage space, accessibility by the visually impaired, easily updated information or the addition of video content. We wanted to assess the attitudes of patients (vaccine recipients or their parents) to the potential of replacing PPL with electronic versions.
METHODS
We surveyed vaccinees or their parents in four European countries-Belgium, Italy, Bulgaria and France-for their actual use of vaccine PPLs and their opinions about switching to an electronic package leaflet. Our survey was conducted online because of the COVID-19 pandemic and resulted in 2518 responses to a questionnaire targeted at three specific groups with particular information needs: parents of young children, pregnant women and the elderly (≥ 60 years).
RESULTS
Our main findings are that currently vaccine PPLs are rarely used and frequently unavailable for the vaccinee. Across the four countries surveyed 55-82% of vaccinees would accept an electronic version, as did 64% when there was an option to request a printout of the leaflet.
CONCLUSIONS
We found that switching to electronic versions of vaccine PPLs is an acceptable alternative for the public, potentially increasing the quality and amount of information reaching vaccinees while eliminating some barriers to redistribution of vaccines between countries.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35073891
doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-12510-8
pii: 10.1186/s12889-022-12510-8
pmc: PMC8785016
doi:
Substances chimiques
Vaccines
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
156Subventions
Organisme : Vaccines Europe
ID : Vaccines Europe
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Nat Mater. 2020 Apr;19(4):476
pubmed: 32210398
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2018 Feb;14(2):196-202
pubmed: 28285793
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2020 Oct;108(4):716-718
pubmed: 32337707
J Aging Health. 2021 Jan;33(1-2):147-154
pubmed: 33031007
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2016 Jan;25(1):35-44
pubmed: 26541372
Drug Ther Bull. 2018 Dec;56(12):145-149
pubmed: 30470709
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2015 Feb;24(2):137-43
pubmed: 25044310
Vaccine. 2016 Nov 21;34(48):5840-5844
pubmed: 27789148
JMIR Aging. 2019 Apr 04;2(1):e12243
pubmed: 31518291
BMJ. 2019 May 13;365:l2144
pubmed: 31085543
Vaccine. 2013 Sep 13;31(40):4293-304
pubmed: 23859839
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 07;2:CD011787
pubmed: 28169420
Vaccine. 2020 Sep 22;38(41):6381-6387
pubmed: 32826103
Vaccine. 2012 May 28;30(25):3727-33
pubmed: 22365840
Health Expect. 2007 Sep;10(3):286-98
pubmed: 17678517
Ther Adv Vaccines Immunother. 2019 Sep 25;7:2515135519868152
pubmed: 31598582
J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2007 Nov-Dec;47(6):717-24
pubmed: 18032134
Soc Sci Med. 2019 Nov;240:112552
pubmed: 31561111
Vaccine. 2006 Mar 24;24(14):2491-6
pubmed: 16430994
Annu Rev Public Health. 2006;27:235-59
pubmed: 16533116
Vaccine. 2010 Feb 17;28(7):1709-16
pubmed: 20045099
Nature. 2020 Apr;580(7801):15-16
pubmed: 32214240
Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2018 Jul 3;14(7):1654-1659
pubmed: 29553872
Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep). 2011 Mar;(199):1-941
pubmed: 23126607
Vaccine. 2015 Aug 14;33(34):4161-4
pubmed: 25896383
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2011 Sep;20(9):987-95
pubmed: 21796721
Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2020 Apr 9;11:2042098620915057
pubmed: 32313618
J Appl Gerontol. 2020 Feb;39(2):141-150
pubmed: 30353776
Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2017 Dec;18(3):149-207
pubmed: 29611455
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Apr 30;(4):CD008416
pubmed: 23633355
Drug Ther Bull. 2019 Aug;57(8):119-124
pubmed: 31345957
Expert Rev Vaccines. 2020 Feb;19(2):123-132
pubmed: 31990601
Pharm Pract (Granada). 2016 Apr-Jun;14(2):702
pubmed: 27382423
Lancet Infect Dis. 2020 Jan;20(1):e11-e16
pubmed: 31706795
Patient Educ Couns. 2010 Jul;80(1):113-9
pubmed: 19854022
Ann Pharmacother. 2007 May;41(5):777-82
pubmed: 17405820
Arch Intern Med. 2005 Dec 12-26;165(22):2618-24
pubmed: 16344419
Drug Saf. 2008;31(4):305-12
pubmed: 18366241
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2020 Jan;16(1):62-67
pubmed: 30853509
Rev Saude Publica. 2015;49:4
pubmed: 25741660
BMC Public Health. 2020 Aug 17;20(1):1253
pubmed: 32807124
Nature. 2019 Nov;575(7781):119-129
pubmed: 31695203