ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2013
Aspects of physicians' attitudes towards the rational use of drugs at a training and research hospital: a survey study.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the attitudes of specialist and family physicians regarding rational drug selection.Northern clinics of Istanbul · 2018Article
- Disease proportions and drug prescribing pattern observed in a free health camp organized at Dhorphirdi Village Development Committee of Western Nepal.BMC research notes · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe rational use of drugs (RUD) is primarily the responsibility of physicians. The aim of this study was to investigate whether physicians are aware of RUD principles and how they apply them in daily medical practice.
methodsA total 136 physicians working at the Kartal Training and Research Hospital in Istanbul were enrolled in the study between February and March 2012. A face-to-face interview was conducted with physicians to assess their knowledge and attitude regarding RUD.
resultsA large majority of the physicians declared that consultation time was insufficient (84 %). The data obtained from the survey indicate that 54 % of the enrolled physicians monitored the therapeutic outcome and that 27 % found the information given to the patient to be sufficient. Participating physicians stated that the less known characteristics of the drugs they prescribed were drug interactions, traceability in market, and price. The most preferred reference source was Vademecum (a drug guideline prepared by the private sector). Two major factors contributing to prescribing patterns were "self study" and "observation of teachers" at clinical training. There was a significant difference between internists-surgeons and residents-specialists in the number of prescribed drugs per prescription (p < 0.001) and in the information provided to the patient on the prescribed drugs (name, effect, dose, instructions, possible side effect) (p < 0.05), respectively.
conclusionsOur findings overall show that the principles of RUD were not fully applied in daily medical practice by the participating physicians. One important reason for this is a heavy patient load, which requires a change in managerial practices within the healthcare system. The other, more essential explanation is education; consequently, serious consideration should be given to including effective clinical pharmacotherapy training and RUD courses in the medical education curriculum.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23588563What 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.