Prescriber perceptions of boxed warnings: A qualitative study

Abstract

AbstractPurposeTo explore how boxed warning (BW) information fits within the context of prescribers' overall treatment decision‐making and communication with patients.MethodsIn‐depth interviews (N = 52) were conducted with primary care providers and specialists. Participants were presented with one of two prescribing scenarios: (1) estrogen vaginal inserts to treat vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA) associated with menopause; or (2) direct‐acting antivirals (DAA) to treat chronic hepatitis C virus infection (HCV). The semi‐structured interviews explored participants' treatment decision‐making within the scenario, reactions to current prescribing information for a product within the FDA‐approved drug class, as well as their perceptions of BWs generally.ResultsAcross scenarios, providers described that the BW is only one of several factors that influence treatment decision‐making. In the VVA scenario, symptom severity, family history, and experience with nonprescription drugs were raised as common factors that influence prescribing considerations; compared to comorbid infections, viral load, and HCV genotype in the HCV scenario. Perceptions of the DAA BW were generally positive or neutral, as many participants found the information important and appropriate. The VVA BW was viewed less favorably, with many participants stating the BW overstates the risk for this drug.ConclusionsFindings suggest that BWs are one of several factors that influence providers' treatment decisions, and BW influence largely depends on context. Providers across scenarios expressed notable differences in their perceptions of the risk information provided in the presented BWs; however, across scenarios participants expressed consideration of how patients may perceive the BW.