Effect of Feedback Letters to Physicians and Pharmacists on the Appropriate Use of Medication in the Treatment of Asthma
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Suboptimal medication treatment of asthma has been reported. More specifically, short-acting beta 2-agonists are overused, while inhaled corticosteroids are underused. This can be related in part to poor adherence by patients to the prescribed regimen and to professionals' failure to comply with practice guidelines. Feedback seems to have an effect on professional practices related to medication use. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of feedback letters to physicians and pharmacists on their patients' appropriate use of asthma medication. METHODS: Two randomized trials were set up in the province of Quebec, Canada: one with physicians and another with pharmacists. A sample of voluntary physicians and pharmacists was randomly assigned to either the experimental group or to the control group. Those in the experimental groups received three consecutive feedback letters over a 9-month period summarizing the asthma medications acquired by their patients over the preceding year. The feedback focused on short-acting beta 2-agonists, long-acting beta 2-agonists and antileukotrienes and provided information on compliance with five appropriate-use criteria. Pharmacists received aggregate profiles and individual profiles with patients' names, while most physicians received aggregate profiles for all their eligible patients. Each mailing also included a pamphlet that summarized practice guidelines on asthma treatment. RESULTS: Seventy-one physicians and 60 pharmacists participated in the study. Physicians who received the feedback letters did not differ from those in the control group in terms of their proportion of prescriptions compliant with the criteria, either before the feedback or after it (p > 0.05). The before-after difference was also similar between groups. The same was true for pharmacists. However, although the before-after difference for criteria 1 (frequency of use of short-acting beta 2-agonists) and 2 (frequency of use of long-acting beta 2-agonists) did not reach the usual statistical significance threshold of 0.05, the p value was under 0.10. CONCLUSIONS: As designed in this study, feedback provided to physicians did not improve the appropriate use of asthma medication. However, feedback to pharmacists is promising, especially when including patients' names so that pharmacists can intervene more specifically.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».