Long Term Follow-up Studies of Users of Nonprescription Medicines Purchased from Community Pharmacies: Some Methodological Issues
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Background: Despite the wider availability of medicines to the general public, little is known about their safety when supplied without prescription. Pilot work has already tested 4 methods of recruiting users of ibuprofen purchased from community pharmacies. This paper describes the piloting of a fifth method (a shortened questionnaire), long term follow-up rates of all methods, consistency of reporting of ibuprofen use, and issues relating to possible comparison groups in pharmacovigilance studies.
Methods: A shortened version of a previously tested recruitment questionnaire was used. Eligible study participants were all users, aged over 17 years, purchasing ibuprofen from a research network of community pharmacies (n = 61) in Grampian, Scotland. Postal questionnaires were sent at I week and 2, 6 and 12 months irrespective of the method of recruitment. The follow-up questionnaires collected information about ibuprofen and other drug usage, symptoms and associated health service utilisation.
Results: The shortened form recruited 67% of people issued with a questionnaire. The overall 12-month follow-up rate was 67%, although there were important differences in the rates by method of recruitment. There was reasonable consistency in the reporting of use or non-use of ibuprofen at different follow-up times. In the 12 months after the index purchase, 17% of participants never used any ibuprofen (non-users) and 28% used it for more than 8 weeks in total (long term users). At 12 months, long term users were significantly more likely than short term users (< or =8 weeks total use) or non-users to have experienced dizziness, skin rash, itchy skin and wheeziness in the previous week.
Conclusions: Our pilot work has confirmed the feasibility of recruiting, and following-up over prolonged periods, users of nonprescription medicines. Evidence of long term use of ibuprofen confirms the need for pharmacovigilance studies of this drug, although further work is required to identify a suitable comparison group in order to inform the interpretation of such investigations.
Kamekis A, Symvoulakis E, Papadakis N, Zoras O, Lionis C Curr Pharm Teach Learn. 2020; 12(12):1390-1393.
PMID: 33092767 PMC: 7386439. DOI: 10.1016/j.cptl.2020.07.010.
Paudyal V, Cunningham S, Smith K, MacLure K, Ryan C, Cordina M PLoS One. 2018; 13(10):e0205087.
PMID: 30286166 PMC: 6171901. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205087.
Frisk P, Sporrong S, Ljunggren G, Wettermark B, von Euler M Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2016; 72(6):747-54.
PMID: 26922586 DOI: 10.1007/s00228-016-2028-y.
Kontogiorgis C, Nena E, Berberoglou E, Moschoni K, Polyzois S, Tselemponis A Pain Ther. 2015; 5(1):19-28.
PMID: 26696539 PMC: 4912963. DOI: 10.1007/s40122-015-0042-x.
Duong M, Salvo F, Pariente A, Abouelfath A, Lassalle R, Droz C Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2013; 77(5):887-95.
PMID: 24102791 PMC: 4004409. DOI: 10.1111/bcp.12239.