Background In chronic inflammatory rheumatism (CIR), preventing joint damage and function loss is based on regularly taking medication. Patients’ involvements in their therapeutic management is essential and can be improved by information provided during pharmaceutical consultations.

Purpose To evaluate patients’ knowledge of synthetic conventional and biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and to assess patients’ satisfaction with the pharmaceutical consultation.

Material and methods A 3 month prospective study was carried out. Inclusion criteria: patients >18 years of age, diagnosed with CIR, attending rheumatology day hospitalisation, treated by biologic DMARDs and methotrexate (MTX). Two questionnaires were used to evaluate patients’ knowledge: biologic DMARD (10 questions) and MTX (20 questions). Patient satisfaction was assessed using a self-administered questionnaire (7 questions).

Results 40 patients were included (M/F=14/26; mean age=51.6 years, treated by biotherapy for 4.7 years and MTX for 6.8 years). 80.0% received infliximab, 12.5% tocilizumab and 7.5% abatacept. Average per cent of correct answers related to biologic DMARD was 53.5%±28.5%. The necessity of blood test monitoring (80.0%), treatment goal (67.5%) and recommended vaccines (65.0%) were the best known items. Conversely, vaccine contraindications (35.0%), regular consultation with physician specialists (40.8%) and strategy in case of surgery or tooth extraction (50.0%) were lesser known items and patients required information supplements. Regarding MTX (77.5% oral form and 22.5% subcutaneously), percentage of correct answers was 39.5%±17.6%. The best known items were: storage rules (93.5%), non-concomitant administration of folic acid and MTX (85.0%) and necessity of blood test monitoring (60.0%). The lesser known items were: reason for use of folic acid (10.0%), management of side effects (16.7%) and side effects (19.2%). 100% of patients were ‘very satisfied’ or ‘satisfied’ by drug information provided during pharmaceutical consultations and. 97.0% thought they had gained knowledge. Finally, all thought that pharmaceutical consultations should be generalised.

Conclusion Our study design allowed us to evaluate patients’ knowledge about their treatments, to identify areas for improvement and to issue individualised information. Thus pharmacists should particularly insist on the lesser known items. In order to generalise these pharmaceutical consultations and confirm their relevance, the impact of this intervention on improving patient knowledge will be assessed.

No conflict of interest