Clinical Research Unit (Homeopathy), Central Council for Research in Homeopathy, Government of India, Gokhel Road, Arabindapally, Siliguri, Darjeeling, West Bengal, India.
Department of Pathology and Microbiology, Mahesh Bhattacharyya Homeopathic Medical College and Hospital, Government of West Bengal, West Bengal, India.
J Tradit Complement Med. 2014 Oct;4(4):289-92. doi: 10.4103/2225-4110.133987.
A preliminary version of the homeopathic prescribing and patient care indicators was available. The instrument was modified further in this study with an intention to address formally its validity and reliability, audit prescriptions, identify areas of sub-optimal prescribing, and highlight target areas for improving the quality of practices. A cross-sectional study with record analysis was conducted on systematically sampled 377 patients of Mahesh Bhattacharyya Homeopathic Medical College and Hospital (MBHMC and H), Howrah, West Bengal, India. The outcome measures were homeopathic prescribing indicators (6 items) and patient care indicators (5 items). Individualized homeopathic prescriptions predominated in the encounters. Areas demanding immediate attention were extremely poor labeling of drugs dispensed from the hospital pharmacy, improper record of case history and disease diagnosis, ongoing therapies, and investigational findings in the prescriptions. Internal consistency of the overall instrument was estimated to be good (Cronbach's alpha: Prescribing indicators 0.752 and patient care indicators 0.791). The prescribing indicators, except items 1 and 3, reflected acceptable item-corrected total correlations - Pearson's r from 0.58 (95% CI: 0.52-0.65) to 0.74 (95% CI: 0.69-0.78). The patient care indicators, except item 2, showed acceptable correlations - Pearson's r from 0.40 (95% CI: 0.31-0.48) to 0.82 (95% CI: 0.78-0.85). The instrument also showed high discriminant validity (prescribing indicators P < 0.0001 and patient care indicators P < 0.0001). Improper prescribing practice was quite rampant and corrective measures are warranted. The developed indicators appeared to be validated and reliable; however, they are amendable for further development.
初步版本的顺势疗法处方和患者护理指标已经可用。本研究进一步修改了该工具，旨在正式确定其有效性和可靠性，审核处方，确定处方中存在的次优领域，并突出需要改进实践质量的目标领域。在印度西孟加拉邦豪拉的 Mahesh Bhattacharyya 顺势疗法医学院和医院 (MBHMC and H) ，对系统抽样的 377 名患者进行了横断面研究和记录分析。结果测量指标为顺势疗法处方指标（6 项）和患者护理指标（5 项）。个体化顺势疗法处方在就诊中占主导地位。需要立即关注的领域是医院药房配药标签极差、病史和疾病诊断记录不当、正在进行的治疗和处方中的检查结果。整个工具的内部一致性估计良好（Cronbach 的 alpha：处方指标为 0.752，患者护理指标为 0.791）。除第 1 项和第 3 项外，处方指标反映了可接受的项目校正总分相关 - Pearson's r 从 0.58（95%CI：0.52-0.65）到 0.74（95%CI：0.69-0.78）。除第 2 项外，患者护理指标显示了可接受的相关性 - Pearson's r 从 0.40（95%CI：0.31-0.48）到 0.82（95%CI：0.78-0.85）。该工具还显示出较高的判别有效性（处方指标 P < 0.0001，患者护理指标 P < 0.0001）。处方不当的情况相当普遍，需要采取纠正措施。所开发的指标似乎经过验证且可靠；然而，它们可以进一步改进。
