• 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

DOI:10.3310/hsdr03420
PMID:26539601
Abstract

BACKGROUND

High-risk primary care prescribing is common and is known to vary considerably between practices, but the extent to which high-risk prescribing varies among individual general practitioners (GPs) is not known.

OBJECTIVES

To create prescribing safety indicators usable in existing electronic clinical data and to examine (1) variation in high-risk prescribing between patients, GPs and practices including reliability of measurement and (2) changes over time in high-risk prescribing prevalence and variation between practices.

DESIGN

Descriptive analysis and multilevel logistic regression modelling of routine data.

SETTING

UK general practice using routine electronic medical record data.

PARTICIPANTS

(1) For analysis of variation and reliability, 398 GPs and 26,539 patients in 38 Scottish practices. (2) For analysis of change in high-risk prescribing, ≈ 300,000 patients particularly vulnerable to adverse drug effects registered with 190 Scottish practices.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

For the analysis of variation between practices and between GPs, five indicators of high-risk non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) prescribing. For the analysis of change in high-risk prescribing, 19 previously validated indicators.

RESULTS

Measurement of high-risk prescribing at GP level was feasible only for newly initiated drugs and for drugs similar to NSAIDs which are usually initiated by GPs. There was moderate variation between practices in total high-risk NSAID prescribing [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.034], but this indicator was highly reliable (> 0.8 for all practices) at distinguishing between practices because of the large number of patients being measured. There was moderate variation in initiation of high-risk NSAID prescribing between practices (ICC 0.055) and larger variation between GPs (ICC 0.166), but measurement did not reliably distinguish between practices and had reliability > 0.7 for only half of the GPs in the study. Between quarter (Q)2 2004 and Q1 2009, the percentage of patients exposed to high-risk prescribing measured by 17 indicators that could be examined over the whole period fell from 8.5% to 5.2%, which was largely driven by reductions in high-risk NSAID and antiplatelet use. Variation between practices increased for five indicators and decreased for five, with no relationship between change in the rate of high-risk prescribing and change in variation between practices.

CONCLUSIONS

High-risk prescribing is common and varies moderately between practices. High-risk prescribing at GP level cannot be easily measured routinely because of the difficulties in accurately identifying which GP actually prescribed the drug and because drug initiation is often a shared responsibility with specialists. For NSAID initiation, there was approximately three times greater variation between GPs than between practices. Most GPs with above average high-risk prescribing worked in practices which were not themselves above average. The observed reductions in high-risk prescribing between 2004 and 2009 were largely driven by falls in NSAID and antiplatelet prescribing, and there was no relationship between change in rate and change in variation between practices. These results are consistent with improvement interventions in all practices being more appropriate than interventions targeted on practices or GPs with higher than average high-risk prescribing. There is a need for research to understand why high-risk prescribing varies and to design and evaluate interventions to reduce it.

FUNDING

Funding for this study was provided by the Health Services and Delivery Research programme of the National Institute for Health Research.

摘要

相似文献

1
2
Bad apples or spoiled barrels? Multilevel modelling analysis of variation in high-risk prescribing in Scotland between general practitioners and between the practices they work in.坏苹果还是变质桶?对苏格兰全科医生及其工作的诊所之间高风险处方差异的多层次建模分析。
BMJ Open. 2015 Nov 6;5(11):e008270. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008270.
3
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
4
High risk prescribing in primary care patients particularly vulnerable to adverse drug events: cross sectional population database analysis in Scottish general practice.高风险处方在初级保健患者中尤其容易发生药物不良事件:苏格兰全科医疗中的横断面人群数据库分析。
BMJ. 2011 Jun 21;342:d3514. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d3514.
5
6
High-risk prescribing in an Irish primary care population: trends and variation.爱尔兰初级保健人群中的高风险处方:趋势与差异
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2017 Dec;83(12):2821-2830. doi: 10.1111/bcp.13373. Epub 2017 Aug 16.
7
Influencing NSAID prescribing in primary care using different feedback strategies.使用不同反馈策略影响基层医疗中NSAID的处方开具情况。
Pharm World Sci. 2000 Apr;22(2):39-46. doi: 10.1023/a:1008790925035.
8
Prescription of Controlled Substances: Benefits and Risks管制药品的处方:益处与风险
9
The implementation of academic detailing and its effectiveness on appropriate prescribing of pain relief medication: a real-world cluster randomized trial in Belgian general practices.学术细化的实施及其对疼痛缓解药物合理处方的效果:比利时普通实践中的真实世界集群随机试验。
Implement Sci. 2018 Jan 10;13(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0703-8.
10
Personal formularies. An index of prescribing quality?个人处方集。处方质量指标?
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2001 Jul;57(4):333-41. doi: 10.1007/s002280100310.