Physicians' and pharmacists' perspective on clarity and clinical relevance of absolute contraindications in “Summaries of Product Characteristics”.

Aims Methods Results Conclusions Previous work has identified several limitations in “Summaries of Product Characteristics” (SmPCs), which are associated with risks for patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate pharmacists' and physicians' interpretation of contraindications in SmPCs and reasons for their nonadherence in clinical routine.For 20 commonly missed or ignored absolute contraindications, an anonymous online survey providing 24 clinical example cases (one or two per contraindication) for physicians and pharmacists was developed. Experts in medication safety were asked whether the respective case fulfilled the definition of the contraindication in the SmPC: (a) formally, irrespective of the clinical relevance of the contraindication (17 cases), and (b) whether the contraindication was deemed clinically relevant in each respective case (24 cases).Twenty‐seven pharmacists and 27 physicians completed the survey. For only one case (1/17; 5.8%) did all experts agree on the same answer option regarding the formal fulfilment of a given contraindication statement. Experts gave heterogeneous answers regarding the interpretation of a contraindication. For instance, among 10 predefined answer options for the contraindication “active liver disease” in the SmPC of simvastatin, every option was selected by at least six experts. In 17/24 (70.8%) clinical example cases a majority of experts agreed on the clinical relevance of a given contraindication. Key reasons for nonadherence to contraindications were “patient monitoring possible”, “lack of alternative treatment” and “acute/severe situations”.Experts' disagreement on the interpretation of contraindications in SmPCs using clinical example cases indicates that further efforts are needed to improve their usability in clinical routine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]