Pharmacy World & Science

, Volume 30, Issue 3, pp 258–264 | Cite as

Changes in attitudes among Japanese patients after Pharmacist Law revision

  • Naomi IiharaEmail author
  • Yuji Kurosaki
  • Chika Miyoshi
  • Kiyo Takabatake
  • Shushi Morita
Research Article


Objective To assess changes in patients’ perception of their medications and their adherence to regimens after enactment of the Japanese Pharmacist Law revision of 1997, which stipulated provision of drug information to patients as one of the principal duties of pharmacists. Setting A university hospital in Japan. Method Comparison of cross sectional analyses between two time periods: shortly after enactment of the Pharmacist Law revision and about a half-decade later. Main Outcome Measure Patient’s knowledge of the medications, anxiety level, individual beliefs regarding taking medications without anxiety, and adherence to the medication regimens. Results There were 141 and 151 patients who participated during each period, respectively. The proportion of non-adherent patients significantly decreased from 68.8 to 53.6% (P = 0.008). Multiple logistic regression analysis indicated that the features of the intentionally non-adherent patients have changed; they have switched from persons who lack general comprehension about the medications (P = 0.01), ones who place an importance on knowing the side effects (P = 0.04), or who place no value on mutual reliance on their doctors (P = 0.03) into persons who place no value on understanding the purpose of taking their medications (P = 0.04) or who place value on multiple items to take medications without anxiety (P = 0.03), i.e., supposedly people who prefer thinking about their drug therapy from their own point of view based on comprehension of their disease and medications. Conclusions The rapid progression of drug information disclosure after enactment of the Pharmacist Law revision has likely resulted in drastic changes in patients’ perception of their medications and led to improvements in medication adherence.


Administrative pharmacy Drug information Healthcare reform Information Japan Patient compliance Patient perceptions Service provision 


  1. 1.
    Sookaneknun P, Richards RM, Sanguansermsri J, Teerasut C. Pharmacist involvement in primary care improves hypertensive patient clinical outcomes. Ann Pharmacother 2004;38:2023–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cioffi ST, Caron MF, Kalus JS, Hill P, Buckley TE. Glycosylated hemoglobin, cardiovascular, and renal outcomes in a pharmacist-managed clinic. Ann Pharmacother 2004;38:771–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Emmerton L, Shaw J, Kheir N. Asthma management by New Zealand pharmacists: a pharmaceutical care demonstration project. J Clin Pharm Ther 2003;28:395–402.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cordina M, McElnay JC, Hughes CM. Assessment of a community pharmacy-based program for patients with asthma. Pharmacotherapy 2001;21:1196–203.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    van Woerkum CM. The Internet and primary care physicians: coping with different expectations. Am J Clin Nutr 2003;77:1016S–8S.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Health, Labour and Welfare Ministry. Statute database system uploaded by the Health, Labour and Welfare Ministry of Japan (in Japanese). [updated 2007 June; cited 2007 July 4]. Available from:
  7. 7.
    Fujiwara N, Ogasawara H, Suzumura H, Miyaji M. Comparison of the literature on medical accidents from a medical database and articles in daily newspapers in Japan. Nippon Koshu Eisei Zasshi (in Japanese) 2003;50:855–66.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Anonymous. [Newspaper reports on health care]. Banbu (in Japanese) 2001;3:22–5.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Oken M, Creech R, Tormey D, Horton J, Davis T, McFadden E, et al. Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol 1982;5:649–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stephenson BJ, Rowe BH, Haynes RB, Macharia WM, Leon G. The rational clinical examination. Is this patient taking the treatment as prescribed? JAMA 1993;269:2779–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maldonado G, Greenland S. Simulation study of confounder-selection strategies. Am J Epidemiol 1993;138:923–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    World Health Organization. Adherence to long-term therapies: evidence for action. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003. ISBN 9241545992.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mukaide S, Ohhashi Y, Nakatani N, Samizo K. Communication effects of written drug information on patient attitude, especially those of risk information. Jpn J Pharmacoepidemiol (in Japanese) 1997;2:69–81.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Harada K, Yamazaki S, Fujimura A. Providing patients with written information helps them to be aware of and report adverse drug reactions? Br J Clin Pharmacol 1999;47:228–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mottram DR, Reed C. Comparative evaluation of patient information leaflets by pharmacists, doctors and the general public. J Clin Pharm Ther 1997;22:127–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Iihara N, Tsukamoto T, Morita S, Miyoshi C, Takabatake K, Kurosaki Y. Beliefs of chronically ill Japanese patients that lead to intentional non-adherence to medication. J Clin Pharm Ther 2004;29:417–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Charles C, Whelan T, Gafni A. What do we mean by partnership in making decisions about treatment? BMJ 1999;319:780–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kansanaho HM, Puumalainen II, Varunki MM, Airaksinen MS, Aslani P. Attitudes of Finnish community pharmacists toward concordance. Ann Pharmacother 2004;38:1946–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Suarez-Almazor ME. Patient-physician communication. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2004;16:91–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Worley-Louis MM, Schommer JC, Finnegan JR. Construct identification and measure development for investigating pharmacist-patient relationships. Patient Educ Couns 2003;51:229–38.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Michie S, Miles J, Weinman J. Patient-centredness in chronic illness: what is it and does it matter? Patient Educ Couns 2003;51:197–206.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stewart M. The validity of an interview to assess a patient’s drug taking. Am J Prev Med 1987;3:95–100.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Naomi Iihara
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yuji Kurosaki
    • 2
  • Chika Miyoshi
    • 3
  • Kiyo Takabatake
    • 3
  • Shushi Morita
    • 4
  1. 1.Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences at Kagawa CampusTokushima Bunri UniversitySanuki-cityJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Faculty of Pharmaceutical SciencesOkayama UniversityOkayamaJapan
  3. 3.Department of PharmacyKagawa University HospitalKita-gunJapan
  4. 4.Faculty of Pharmaceutical SciencesHiroshima International UniversityHiroshimaJapan

Personalised recommendations