BNF Extended Feed Market and Audience Intelligence Team

Methods and sample Online survey: 101 users of the BNF completed the survey (type ahead) Interviews: 4 pharmacists provided their views of 6 wireframes 3 telephone interviews and 1 face-to-face interview

Drug information Drug information searched for: The BNF in Medicines Complete website is usually the starting point (64%) Medicines/drug name are the most popular search terms (64%) The name of the condition is never used as a search term Specific BNF information looked for: Specific BNF information: various, depending on the type of enquiry BNF is one of the key sources

Retaining information from previous visits A function that retains information about their previous visit is not valued by BNF users However, it is important to link between BNF treatment summaries and NICE guidance and advice on a topic (78%) The link will make things easier for users and would be useful for providing more detail/knowledge BNF users (54%) BNF users (21%) Retaining information from previous visits Least valuable Most valuable

Type ahead Dropdown list Ordering: A useful shortcut to quickly see the relevant information Particularly useful for those accessing a single piece of information Length: drugs with similar spelling, e.g. Moxifloxacine vs. Moxonidine Ordering: 3 out of 4 though the ordering is fine and should be similar to the current BNF 1 felt that it should be ordered based on frequency

Results page Content: Layout: Nearly 3 quarters rated the amount and type of information displayed ‘good’ or ‘extremely good’ Repetitive information: e.g. oral and IV The list doesn't follow alphabetically and needs a better way to order. Layout: Nearly 3 quarters (69%) rated the layout ‘good’ or ‘extremely good’ Positive: 2 like the information separated into different boxes Negative: 2 are used to see a big paragraph instead of separating the information into different boxes; extra work when copying and pasting Navigation: Over 3 quarters ‘agreed’, it is clear and easy to navigate

Suggested improvements Despite generally being positive about the enhanced BNF, users did also highlight further improvements: Content: include drug class, severity of the interactions, chapter summaries, etc. side effects: the complete list with the (very) common side effects at the top. Functionality: allow additional/ general information accessible through hyperlinks and/ or hover boxes Layout: match existing layouts and Medicines Complete versions Include additional content such as, drug classes, separate nature and severity of the interactions, available forms, discontinued drugs, where the information has come from, chapter summaries, full monographs, descriptions of the interactions, available forms, pack sizes, and prices and different preparations/strengths Improve design by using fonts, colour coding and bold text to make the information clearer

Moxiflioxacin monograph Layout: cards: 2 felt that it’s nicely laid out; separated boxes are clear and easy to see; and less click is better due to internet connection 3 columns: 2 thought that it’s less information to take in and less confusing Content: level of information is fine but a bit repetitive, e.g. contra-indications with oral/ intravenous use Navigation: easy to navigate

Suggestions Layout of 3 columns: better use of space Ordering: retain the current BNF layout/ text, e.g. Sinusitis is the 1st in the list of indications Print: options to select different pieces of information, e.g. print dialogue Share: never use it (only 1 comment)

Ondansetron monograph Layout: Click tablet: 2 felt that it’s nicely laid out, a header on the top making it clear Gov.uk: 1 thought that it keeps the key structure and easy to navigate Content: Level of information is appropriate Useful information, especially price and manufactory Breadcrumbs: 2 use it and 2 use back button

Suggestions Layout Content: Gov.uk: cramped so need more space Separate 4mg and 8mg Alphabetical order for brand name List the Drug Tariff at the top as they are the same

A-Z Layout: Search: more likely to use search instead of A-Z Nicely laid out, easy to find information, consistent with NICE website useful for those who are not sure about the spelling or not familiar with BNF 1 doesn't use 'A-Z' he is familiar with BNF, e.g. he wouldn't look for bisoprolol under B he'd go to cardiovascular first. So he'd prefer go to chapter and then class of drug, like current BNF structure. Search: more likely to use search instead of A-Z Drug topics using capitals: look fine Expected next page: full monograph

Key findings Overall it’s better than the current BNF. Nearly 3 quarters start their journey in the BNF Medicines Complete website and use medicine/ drug name to search Type ahead and results page: positive received in general Most preferred monograph: 1 prefer click tablet, 1 like 3 columns but the space needs to be between gov.uk and even 3 columns and 2 like cards A-Z page: more likely to use search function Key improvements: More information: renal impairment, pregnancy, drug class, discontinued drug, relevant guidance Layout: better use of space Less click is better due to internet connection issue Overall it’s better than the current BNF. 1) easy to search and navigate and not distracted by too much information in one place 2) include more information: a) renal impairment and pregnancy in the monograph b) what class the drug belongs to. c) discontinued drug d) relevant guidance from NICE, MHRA, etc. 3) better use of space; 4) less click is better due to internet connection 5) availability of single monograph with all the information in one place so she can read through that will be easy for her to document them and not miss any information. Overall it's better than current BNF. How to build on the current BNF rather than rebuild the whole.