Current Care, Finnish Medical Society Duodecim, Helsinki.
BMC Fam Pract. 2011 Aug 17;12:87. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-12-87.
Antihypertensive drug choices and treatment levels are not in accordance with the existing guidelines. We aimed to assess the impact of a guideline implementation intervention on antihypertensive drug prescribing.
In this controlled before and after study, the effects of a multifaceted (education, audit and feedback, local care pathway) quality programme was evaluated. The intervention was carried out in a health centre between 2002 and 2003. From each health care unit (n = 31), a doctor-nurse pair was trained to act as peer facilitators in the intervention.All antihypertensive drugs prescribed by 25 facilitator general practitioners (intervention GPs) and 53 control GPs were retrieved from the nationwide Prescription Register for three-month periods in 2001 and 2003. The proportions of patients receiving specific antihypertensive drugs and multiple antihypertensive drugs were measured before and after the intervention for three subgroups of hypertension patients: hypertension only, with coronary heart disease, and with diabetes.
In all subgroups, the use of multiple concurrent medications increased. For intervention patients with hypertension only, the odds ratio (OR) was 1.12 (95% CI 0.99, 1.25; p = 0.06) and for controls 1.13 (1.05, 1.21; p = 0.002). We observed no statistically significant differences in the change in the prescribing of specific antihypertensive agents between the intervention and control groups. The use of agents acting on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system increased in all subgroups (hypertension only intervention patients OR 1.19 (1.06, 1.34; p = 0.004) and controls OR 1.24 (1.15, 1.34; p < 0.0001).
A multifaceted guideline implementation intervention does not necessarily lead to significant changes in prescribing performance. Rigorous planning of the interventions and quality projects and their evaluation are essential.
降压药物的选择和治疗水平不符合现有指南。我们旨在评估实施指南干预对降压药物处方的影响。
在这项对照前后研究中,评估了一种多方面(教育、审核和反馈、当地护理途径)质量方案的效果。该干预措施于 2002 年至 2003 年在一个健康中心进行。从每个医疗保健单位(n=31)中,选择一对医生-护士作为同行促进者接受培训,以参与干预。从全国处方登记处检索了 25 名促进者全科医生(干预组全科医生)和 53 名对照组全科医生在 2001 年和 2003 年三个月期间开具的所有降压药物。在干预前后,分别对三组高血压患者(单纯高血压、冠心病合并高血压和糖尿病合并高血压)测量了接受特定降压药物和多种降压药物的患者比例。
在所有亚组中,同时使用多种药物的比例增加。对于单纯高血压的干预组患者,比值比(OR)为 1.12(95%可信区间 0.99,1.25;p=0.06),对照组为 1.13(1.05,1.21;p=0.002)。我们没有观察到干预组和对照组之间特定降压药物处方变化的统计学显著差异。在所有亚组中,肾素-血管紧张素-醛固酮系统作用药物的使用增加(单纯高血压干预患者 OR 1.19(1.06,1.34;p=0.004)和对照组 OR 1.24(1.15,1.34;p<0.0001))。
多方面的指南实施干预不一定会导致处方行为的显著变化。对干预措施和质量项目进行严格的规划及其评估至关重要。