Information and communication on risks related to medications and proper use of medications for healthcare professionals and the general public: precautionary principle, risk management, communication during and in the absence of crisis situations.

Recent drug crises have highlighted the complexity, benefits and risks of medication communication. The difficulty of this communication is due to the diversity of the sources of information and the target audience, the credibility of spokespersons, the difficulty to communicate on scientific uncertainties and the precautionary principle, which is influenced by variable perceptions and tolerances of the risk. Globally, there is a lack of training in risk management with a tendency of modern society to refuse even the slightest risk. Communication on medications is subject to regulatory or legal requirements, often uses tools and messages that are not adapted to the target audience and is often based on a poor knowledge of communication techniques. In order to improve this situation, the available information must be coordinated by reinforcing the unique medication information website and by coordinating communication between authorities by means of a single spokesperson. A particular effort must be made in the field of training in the proper use and risk of medications for both the general population and patients but also for healthcare professionals, by setting up a unified academic on-line teaching platform for continuing medical education on medications and their proper use.

[Perceptual gap between oncologists/oncology nurses and patients in the management and impact of chemotherapy/radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: French results of the GAP survey]. / Écarts d'évaluation entre oncologues, infirmiers et patients dans la prise en charge et l'impact des nausées et vomissements chimio/radio-induits : résultats français de l'enquête GAP.

INTRODUCTION: Despite progress in the treatment of chemotherapy/radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV/RINV), their management remains insufficient. METHODS: In order to evaluate the incidence and impact of CINV/RINV on the quality of life perceived by patients and estimated by clinicians, a declarative, cross-sectional survey was conducted in France through an online questionnaire. RESULTS: This survey included 187 participants: 75 oncologists, 35 oncology nurses and 77 patients. Clinicians over-estimated the incidence of CINV/RINV, but underestimated their impact on the quality of life of patients. The sub-optimal prescription of anti-emetic treatments was more prominent when the therapy administered had low or medium emetogenic potential. Only 30% of patients rated their nausea and vomiting as controlled from the start. A major proportion of patients (68%) declared poor compliance with their anti-emetic regimen. The acceptance of CINV/RINV as normal side effects of the chemotherapy/radiotherapy (51%) led the patients not to report them, thus limiting their active management. The number of drugs to absorb, and the fear that the action of swallowing the pill would induce nausea or vomiting were also quoted by the patients as compliance-limiting factors. CONCLUSION: The perceptual gap between clinicians and patients regarding the incidence and impact of CINV/RINV contributes to a sub-optimal level of anti-emetic cover and control. The anti-emetic regimen needs to be regularly assessed and adapted to the patient in order to improve CINV/RINV management.

Optimization of heart FailUre medical Treatment after hospital discharge according to left ventricUlaR Ejection fraction: the FUTURE survey.

BACKGROUND: No clinical practice guidelines are available for the treatment of heart failure (HF) in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). AIMS: To determine how cardiologists manage medical treatment in HF patients after hospital discharge, according to LVEF. METHODS: The FUTURE study was a cross-sectional survey conducted in HF outpatients by French private cardiologists between September 2007 and August 2008. Patients had to have been hospitalized within the previous 18 months with a diagnosis of HF. Clinical data and HF treatments (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors [ACEIs], angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs], beta-blockers, diuretics and aldosterone antagonists) were recorded retrospectively, with precise information on drug doses, at two successive time points (at hospital discharge and at the index consultation). HF treatment was compared in patients with reduced (less than or equal to 40%) versus preserved (more than 40%) LVEF. RESULTS: Completed data were available for 1137 HF patients enrolled by 424 cardiologists. Mean patient age was 72±11 years; LVEF was reduced in 56% and preserved in 44%. The therapeutic approach was similar in the two groups, both at hospital discharge and at the index consultation. At the index consultation, HF treatment was: beta-blocker (74%); ACEI/ARB (83%); loop diuretic (86%); aldosterone antagonist (31%). The majority of patients (62%) received a beta-blocker plus an ACEI or an ARB; 56% reached more than or equal to 50% of the target dose for each treatment. There were no major differences in treatments and dosages between the groups with low and preserved LVEF. In 15% of cases where the drug dose was not increased, fear of adverse events was reported as the reason. CONCLUSION: The FUTURE survey showed a similar approach to HF treatment irrespective of LVEF. Compared with previous studies, we saw an improvement in the use of recommended HF drugs, especially beta-blockers. However, achievement of target doses could be improved.