ArticleAtencion primaria2015
[A pilot study in a community pharmacy to determine the efficiency and the effectiveness of statin prescriptions].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe efficacy of statins to reduce LDL-cholesterol serum levels is high, but effectiveness is limited and costs are elevated.
objectiveThe efficiency and effectiveness of prescriptions were analyzed in a pilot study in a community pharmacy.
designA cross-sectional study. LOCATION: Community pharmacy. Prescriptions from two Murcian Health Service Centers in Lorca, Murcia (Spain).
participantsA total of 141 patients and 32 general practitioners were included. The efficiency was analyzed in 141 and effectiveness in 110 patients. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Socio-demographic characteristics and clinical history of patients and information about statin type and dosage were collected. Each patient was analyzed to determine the effectiveness of treatment according to cardiovascular risk and previous LDL-cholesterol level, and efficiency comparing the statin prescribed against other statins with equal pharmacological power.
resultsThe most prescribed statin was atorvastatin (57.4%). Almost two-thirds (63.9%) of prescriptions were inefficient, and 17.3% were ineffective. In a bivariate analysis, patients with previous cardiovascular events (8/38; 21% vs 41/103; 39.8%. P=.040) and smokers (42/114; 36.8% vs 4/23; 17.4%, P=.047) were more likely to receive an inefficient prescription than patients with no cardiovascular events and non-smokers. In a multivariate analysis, smokers were more likely to receive an inefficient prescription than non-smokers (OR ajusted 3.76; 95% CI;1.03-0.77, P=.012).
conclusionsMost of the participants reached therapeutic objectives for LDL-Cholesterol levels, but more than half of the prescriptions were considered inefficient.
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.