ArticleAtencion primaria2000
[Relationship between quality and cost of the drug prescription in primary care].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cross-sectional study of the association between empathy and burnout and drug prescribing quality in primary care.Primary health care research & development · 2019Article
- [Influential factors in the quality of prescription in primary care and relation to pharmaceutical expenditure].Revista espanola de salud publica · 2019Article
- [Patient workload and costs, intensity and quality of family doctor prescriptions].Atencion primaria · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWith a system of qualitative indicators, to analyse the pharmaceutical prescription of general practitioners (GPs), and to evaluate the relationship of these indicators to the overall pharmaceutical prescription expenditure per inhabitant.
designRetrospective descriptive study.
settingPrimary care. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsThe drugs prescription of 285 GPs from 32 primary care teams was evaluated, with the individual prescription of each doctor as the unit of analysis. The prescription was classified in 3 categories according to its intrinsic value (IV): low (< or = 75%), medium (76-79%) and high (> or = 80%). Selected as tracers of over-prescription were: daily dose per inhabitant (DDI) of antibiotics (AB), DDI of non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID), and DDI of ulcer drugs (ULC). Selected as tracers of selection were: % DDI third-generation cephalosporins/DDI total cephalosporins; % DDI broad-spectre quinolones/DDI total quinolones; and % DDI NSAID/DDI NSAID plus analgesics. Quantitative indicators studied were: total expenditure per allocated population, cost per drugs prescription of doubtful efficacy, and cost per daily dose of AB, NSAID and ULC. Variance analysis, including the Scheffe test for multiple comparisons and Pearson's linear correlation, was applied. 26% of the prescriptions had an IV below 75%, and 34% had an IV above 80%. The means of DDI of AB among the categories of IV were different (p < 0.0001), as were those of DDI of NSAID (p < 0.0001) and of ULC (p = 0.007). Lower consumption of AB, NSAID and ULC was found in prescriptions with the highest IV %. The third-generation cephalosporins and the NSAID + analgesics showed significant differences in the three IV categories (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.041), unlike broad-spectrum quinolones (p = 0.18). The total expenditure per allocated population was less for GPs whose prescriptions had the highest IV %; whereas the cost per prescription and cost per daily dose showed no significant differences for IV categories.
conclusionsThe doctors with the best qualitative profile on these indicators had less expenditure per inhabitant. However, no differences were found in the cost per prescription or cost per treatment between doctors. Therefore, interventions must prioritize improving drug prescription quality rather than just promoting changes to lower-cost drugs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.