Assessing the usability of methods of public reporting of adverse drug reactions to the UK Yellow Card Scheme

Claire Anderson, Alison Gifford, Anthony Avery, Heather Fortnum, Elizabeth Murphy, Janet Krska, Christine Margaret Bond

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives The aim of this study, which was part of the first independent evaluation of patient reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to the Yellow Card Scheme, was to observe the three reporting systems (paper, internet and telephone) ‘in use’ in a simulated setting to identify aspects which facilitated or hindered reporting.

Methods Forty adult participants were recruited from the general public using posters in pharmacies and a press article, and from a pool of volunteer simulated patients maintained by University of Nottingham medical and pharmacy schools. The participants, in seven groups that met at different times, were asked to ‘think aloud,’ as they were individually observed completing the reporting process for the paper and internet system, highlighting their thoughts and any issues encountered. They were asked to talk about their experience of reporting immediately after they had reported by telephone. Data from the field notes were analysed thematically and supplemented with relevant information from digital audio recordings.

Conclusions Usability testing using the ‘think aloud’ approach worked well and identified areas of the Yellow Card reporting system which could be improved. Whilst the three methods of reporting available to the public are all reasonably ‘fit for purpose’, there were many suggestions identified for improving ease of completion and data quality, especially for the internet system. When systems for reporting of ADRs are designed, they should be tested by potential users before they are launched, so that potential problems are identified in advance.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)433-440
Number of pages8
JournalHealth Expectations
Volume15
Issue number4
Early online date27 Apr 2011
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2012

Fingerprint

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
Internet
Telephone
Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems
Pharmacy Schools
Posters
Pharmacies
Medical Schools
Volunteers

Keywords

  • adverse drug reaction
  • patient
  • pharmacovigilance
  • reporting
  • thinking aloud
  • usability testing

Cite this

Assessing the usability of methods of public reporting of adverse drug reactions to the UK Yellow Card Scheme. / Anderson, Claire; Gifford, Alison; Avery, Anthony; Fortnum, Heather; Murphy, Elizabeth; Krska, Janet; Bond, Christine Margaret.

In: Health Expectations, Vol. 15, No. 4, 12.2012, p. 433-440.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Anderson, Claire ; Gifford, Alison ; Avery, Anthony ; Fortnum, Heather ; Murphy, Elizabeth ; Krska, Janet ; Bond, Christine Margaret. / Assessing the usability of methods of public reporting of adverse drug reactions to the UK Yellow Card Scheme. In: Health Expectations. 2012 ; Vol. 15, No. 4. pp. 433-440.
@article{0280f27b9e2c4bd59f4cb0b2130ea26b,
title = "Assessing the usability of methods of public reporting of adverse drug reactions to the UK Yellow Card Scheme",
abstract = "Objectives The aim of this study, which was part of the first independent evaluation of patient reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to the Yellow Card Scheme, was to observe the three reporting systems (paper, internet and telephone) ‘in use’ in a simulated setting to identify aspects which facilitated or hindered reporting.Methods Forty adult participants were recruited from the general public using posters in pharmacies and a press article, and from a pool of volunteer simulated patients maintained by University of Nottingham medical and pharmacy schools. The participants, in seven groups that met at different times, were asked to ‘think aloud,’ as they were individually observed completing the reporting process for the paper and internet system, highlighting their thoughts and any issues encountered. They were asked to talk about their experience of reporting immediately after they had reported by telephone. Data from the field notes were analysed thematically and supplemented with relevant information from digital audio recordings.Conclusions Usability testing using the ‘think aloud’ approach worked well and identified areas of the Yellow Card reporting system which could be improved. Whilst the three methods of reporting available to the public are all reasonably ‘fit for purpose’, there were many suggestions identified for improving ease of completion and data quality, especially for the internet system. When systems for reporting of ADRs are designed, they should be tested by potential users before they are launched, so that potential problems are identified in advance.",
keywords = "adverse drug reaction, patient, pharmacovigilance, reporting, thinking aloud, usability testing",
author = "Claire Anderson and Alison Gifford and Anthony Avery and Heather Fortnum and Elizabeth Murphy and Janet Krska and Bond, {Christine Margaret}",
year = "2012",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00686.x",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "433--440",
journal = "Health Expectations",
issn = "1369-6513",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessing the usability of methods of public reporting of adverse drug reactions to the UK Yellow Card Scheme

AU - Anderson, Claire

AU - Gifford, Alison

AU - Avery, Anthony

AU - Fortnum, Heather

AU - Murphy, Elizabeth

AU - Krska, Janet

AU - Bond, Christine Margaret

PY - 2012/12

Y1 - 2012/12

N2 - Objectives The aim of this study, which was part of the first independent evaluation of patient reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to the Yellow Card Scheme, was to observe the three reporting systems (paper, internet and telephone) ‘in use’ in a simulated setting to identify aspects which facilitated or hindered reporting.Methods Forty adult participants were recruited from the general public using posters in pharmacies and a press article, and from a pool of volunteer simulated patients maintained by University of Nottingham medical and pharmacy schools. The participants, in seven groups that met at different times, were asked to ‘think aloud,’ as they were individually observed completing the reporting process for the paper and internet system, highlighting their thoughts and any issues encountered. They were asked to talk about their experience of reporting immediately after they had reported by telephone. Data from the field notes were analysed thematically and supplemented with relevant information from digital audio recordings.Conclusions Usability testing using the ‘think aloud’ approach worked well and identified areas of the Yellow Card reporting system which could be improved. Whilst the three methods of reporting available to the public are all reasonably ‘fit for purpose’, there were many suggestions identified for improving ease of completion and data quality, especially for the internet system. When systems for reporting of ADRs are designed, they should be tested by potential users before they are launched, so that potential problems are identified in advance.

AB - Objectives The aim of this study, which was part of the first independent evaluation of patient reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to the Yellow Card Scheme, was to observe the three reporting systems (paper, internet and telephone) ‘in use’ in a simulated setting to identify aspects which facilitated or hindered reporting.Methods Forty adult participants were recruited from the general public using posters in pharmacies and a press article, and from a pool of volunteer simulated patients maintained by University of Nottingham medical and pharmacy schools. The participants, in seven groups that met at different times, were asked to ‘think aloud,’ as they were individually observed completing the reporting process for the paper and internet system, highlighting their thoughts and any issues encountered. They were asked to talk about their experience of reporting immediately after they had reported by telephone. Data from the field notes were analysed thematically and supplemented with relevant information from digital audio recordings.Conclusions Usability testing using the ‘think aloud’ approach worked well and identified areas of the Yellow Card reporting system which could be improved. Whilst the three methods of reporting available to the public are all reasonably ‘fit for purpose’, there were many suggestions identified for improving ease of completion and data quality, especially for the internet system. When systems for reporting of ADRs are designed, they should be tested by potential users before they are launched, so that potential problems are identified in advance.

KW - adverse drug reaction

KW - patient

KW - pharmacovigilance

KW - reporting

KW - thinking aloud

KW - usability testing

U2 - 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00686.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00686.x

M3 - Article

VL - 15

SP - 433

EP - 440

JO - Health Expectations

JF - Health Expectations

SN - 1369-6513

IS - 4

ER -