• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

丹麦医生对治疗初治患者时选择开依西酞普兰而非西酞普兰和舍曲林的偏好:一项全国性基于登记的研究。

Danish physicians' preferences for prescribing escitalopram over citalopram and sertraline to treatment-naïve patients: a national, register-based study.

机构信息

Faculty of Health and Medicines Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

出版信息

Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2013 May;69(5):1167-71. doi: 10.1007/s00228-012-1447-7. Epub 2012 Nov 6.

DOI:10.1007/s00228-012-1447-7
PMID:23128965
Abstract

PURPOSE

To investigate whether general practitioners, hospital physicians and specialized practitioners in psychiatry have similar preferences for initiating treatment with expensive serotonin-specific reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).

METHODS

All first-time prescriptions for the SSRIs escitalopram, citalopram and sertraline reported to the Danish National Register of Medicinal Product Statistics from April 1, 2009 until March 31, 2010 were analysed with regard to treatment naivety and type of prescriber. A prescription was considered as first time if the patient had not received a prescription for the same drug within the last 2 years. Patients who had not received a prescription for an antidepressant within 6 months prior to the date of redemption were classified as treatment-naïve.

RESULTS

We included 82,702 first-time prescriptions, 65,313 (79 %) of which were for treatment-naïve patients. Of the treatment-naïve patients, 19 % were initially prescribed escitalopram. Hospital physicians prescribed escitalopram to 34 % of their treatment-naïve patients, while practitioners specialized in psychiatry prescribed it to 25 %, and general practitioners prescribed it to 17 %. General practitioners, however, were responsible for initiating 87 % of all treatment-naïve patients.

CONCLUSION

The most expensive SSRI, escitalopram, is prescribed as first choice to one in five patients receiving their first antidepressant of escitalopram, citalopram or sertraline. General practitioners made the bulk of all first-time SSRI prescriptions to treatment-naïve patients.

摘要

目的

调查初级保健医生、医院医生和精神科专科医生在开始使用昂贵的选择性 5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(SSRIs)治疗方面是否具有相似的偏好。

方法

从 2009 年 4 月 1 日至 2010 年 3 月 31 日,对向丹麦国家药品统计数据库报告的所有首次开具的 SSRIs(艾司西酞普兰、西酞普兰和舍曲林)处方进行分析,主要分析指标为治疗初治情况和开具处方的医生类型。如果患者在过去 2 年内未接受同一药物的处方,则认为该处方为首次处方。在开始报销日期前 6 个月内未接受抗抑郁药处方的患者被归类为初治患者。

结果

我们共纳入 82702 例首次处方,其中 65313 例(79%)为初治患者。在初治患者中,19%的患者最初开具了艾司西酞普兰。医院医生为 34%的初治患者开具了艾司西酞普兰,而专门从事精神科的医生开具了 25%,全科医生开具了 17%。然而,全科医生负责启动所有初治患者的 87%。

结论

最昂贵的 SSRIs 艾司西酞普兰是开具给首次接受艾司西酞普兰、西酞普兰或舍曲林治疗的五分之一患者的首选药物。全科医生开出了所有初治患者中首次使用 SSRIs 的大部分处方。

相似文献

1
Danish physicians' preferences for prescribing escitalopram over citalopram and sertraline to treatment-naïve patients: a national, register-based study.丹麦医生对治疗初治患者时选择开依西酞普兰而非西酞普兰和舍曲林的偏好:一项全国性基于登记的研究。
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2013 May;69(5):1167-71. doi: 10.1007/s00228-012-1447-7. Epub 2012 Nov 6.
2
A target trial emulation comparing the antidepressant effectiveness of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) highlighting the importance of patent-related confounding by indication.一项旨在比较选择性 5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(SSRIs)抗抑郁疗效的目标试验模拟研究,强调了与专利相关的适应证混杂的重要性。
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2024 Oct;150(4):198-208. doi: 10.1111/acps.13729. Epub 2024 Jul 12.
3
General practitioners' and hospital physicians' preference for morphine or oxycodone as first-time choice for a strong opioid: a National Register-based study.全科医生和医院医生对吗啡或羟考酮作为强阿片类药物首次选择的偏好:一项基于国家登记的研究。
Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2013 Feb;112(2):110-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-7843.2012.00927.x. Epub 2012 Sep 3.
4
Comparative effectiveness of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for depression in 43,061 older adults with chronic somatic diseases: A Danish target trial emulation study.43061 例患有慢性躯体疾病的老年患者中选择性 5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(SSRIs)治疗抑郁症的效果比较:一项丹麦目标试验模拟研究。
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2024 Mar-Apr;87:83-91. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2024.02.002. Epub 2024 Feb 7.
5
Assessing the comparative-effectiveness of antidepressants commonly prescribed for depression in the US Medicare population.评估美国医疗保险人群中常用于治疗抑郁症的抗抑郁药的相对疗效。
J Ment Health Policy Econ. 2012 Dec;15(4):171-8.
6
Do sociodemographic and clinical factors affect the selection of initial antidepressant treatment for depression in older adults? Results from a nationwide descriptive study in Denmark.社会人口学和临床因素是否会影响老年抑郁症患者初始抗抑郁治疗的选择?来自丹麦全国描述性研究的结果。
J Affect Disord. 2023 Aug 1;334:21-25. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.04.110. Epub 2023 May 3.
7
Persistence, switching, and discontinuation rates among patients receiving sertraline, paroxetine, and citalopram.接受舍曲林、帕罗西汀和西酞普兰治疗的患者的持续治疗率、换药率和停药率。
Pharmacotherapy. 2005 May;25(5):660-7. doi: 10.1592/phco.25.5.660.63590.
8
Comparison of first refill rates among users of sertraline, paroxetine, and citalopram.舍曲林、帕罗西汀和西酞普兰使用者首次续方率的比较。
Clin Ther. 2006 Feb;28(2):297-305; discussion 296. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2006.02.006.
9
A comparative analysis of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and fall risk in older adults.选择性 5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂与老年人跌倒风险的比较分析。
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2022 May;70(5):1450-1460. doi: 10.1111/jgs.17686. Epub 2022 Feb 8.
10
Initial results of the use of prescription order change forms to achieve dose form optimization (consolidation and tablet splitting) of SSRI antidepressants in a state Medicaid program.在一个州医疗补助计划中,使用处方更改单实现选择性5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(SSRI)抗抑郁药剂型优化(合并与片剂分割)的初步结果。
J Manag Care Pharm. 2006 Jul-Aug;12(6):449-56. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2006.12.6.449.

引用本文的文献

1
Double blind, randomised trial to compare efficacy of escitalopram versus citalopram for interferon induced depression in hepatitis C patients.一项比较艾司西酞普兰与西酞普兰治疗丙型肝炎患者干扰素所致抑郁症疗效的双盲随机试验。
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2020 Jul 19;19:100622. doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2020.100622. eCollection 2020 Sep.

本文引用的文献

1
A nationwide prospective study on prescribing pattern of antidepressant drugs in Italian primary care.一项关于意大利初级保健中抗抑郁药处方模式的全国性前瞻性研究。
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2013 Feb;69(2):227-36. doi: 10.1007/s00228-012-1319-1. Epub 2012 Jun 17.
2
Comparative benefits and harms of second-generation antidepressants for treating major depressive disorder: an updated meta-analysis.第二代抗抑郁药治疗重度抑郁症的比较效益和危害:一项更新的荟萃分析。
Ann Intern Med. 2011 Dec 6;155(11):772-85. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-155-11-201112060-00009.
3
The Danish National Prescription Registry.
丹麦国家处方登记处。
Scand J Public Health. 2011 Jul;39(7 Suppl):38-41. doi: 10.1177/1403494810394717.
4
Initial prescription of antipsychotics and antidepressants in general practice and specialist care in Norway.挪威一般医疗实践和专科护理中抗精神病药和抗抑郁药的初始处方。
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2011 Jun;123(6):459-65. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.2011.01697.x. Epub 2011 Mar 14.
5
Explaining the rise in antidepressant prescribing: a descriptive study using the general practice research database.解释抗抑郁药处方量的上升:一项使用全科医疗研究数据库的描述性研究。
BMJ. 2009 Oct 15;339:b3999. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b3999.
6
Escitalopram versus other antidepressive agents for depression.艾司西酞普兰与其他抗抑郁药治疗抑郁症的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Apr 15(2):CD006532. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006532.pub2.
7
Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 12 new-generation antidepressants: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis.12种新一代抗抑郁药的疗效与可接受性比较:一项多治疗组元分析
Lancet. 2009 Feb 28;373(9665):746-58. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60046-5.
8
Is new drug prescribing in primary care specialist induced?基层医疗中的新药处方是由专科医生诱导的吗?
BMC Health Serv Res. 2009 Jan 11;9:6. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-9-6.
9
Comparative benefits and harms of second-generation antidepressants: background paper for the American College of Physicians.第二代抗抑郁药的比较效益与危害:美国医师学会背景文件
Ann Intern Med. 2008 Nov 18;149(10):734-50. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-149-10-200811180-00008.
10
Prescribing patterns of antidepressants in Europe: results from the Factors Influencing Depression Endpoints Research (FINDER) study.欧洲抗抑郁药的处方模式:抑郁症终点影响因素研究(FINDER)的结果
Eur Psychiatry. 2008 Jan;23(1):66-73. doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2007.11.001.