Medicine safety: Experiences and perceptions of the general public in Liverpool

Purpose: To determine whether views of medicine safety, awareness of medicines' side effects and reporting behaviours were related to experiences of suspected side effects among the general public. Method: Street interviews with the general public in central Liverpool, using closed and open questions. University ethics approval was obtained. Results: A total of 436 people were interviewed, most (313; 71.8%) of whom obtained a medicine at least once every 3 months, 153 (37.4%) only prescribed medicines, 73 (16.7%) only over-the-counter (OTC) medicines and 87 (19.9%) both. A total of 198 (45.4%) respondents claimed to have experienced a side effect from a prescription medicine, an OTC medicine or both, and 110 (25.2%) knew someone who had experienced a side effect. Experiences of suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) did not appear to influence perceptions of medicine safety, with most feeling that both prescribed and OTC medicines were safe. Only 94 (21.6%) respondents identified the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency as being responsible for monitoring medicine safety, and only 27 (6.2%) were aware of direct patient reporting. Once informed about direct reporting, over half said that they were strongly likely to report in the future, with the main reasons (272) for reporting being an ADR which was serious, caused hospital admission or affected daily life. Conclusion: Public understanding of medicine safety, how safety is monitored and how to report suspected ADRs is generally limited despite ADRs being commonly experienced. If awareness of direct patient reporting can be increased, the public appear to be willing to report and to be appropriately selective in reporting. © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.