ArticleAtencion primaria
[Effectiveness of an intervention strategy in the biosimilar glargine prescription pattern in primary care].
Article in Atencion primaria. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Barriers to Biosimilar Prescribing Incentives in the Context of Clinical Governance in Spain.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- [Quasi-experimental study of an intervention on the pharmacological management of non-oncological chronic pain in Primary Care].Atencion primariaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo examine the effects of specific interventions on biosimilar glargine insulin (BGI) prescribing in general practices and to analyse the influence of prescriber and economic impact.
designNon randomized controlled study.
settingGeneral practices in 2 health areas of Seville, intervention and control group.
participants220 general practices (intervention group) and 100 general practices (control group).
interventionIntervention group received educational seminars on biosimilar drugs, pharmacotherapeutic bulletin and prescribing feedback. The study was carried out from the biosimilar commercialization, October-2015, to February-2016 (pre-intervention) and from February to August 2016 (intervention). MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Percentage of patients and DDD with BGI respect to total glargine before and during intervention for both areas were analysed. Physicians have been analysed by subgroups of age, sex, training, type of contract, years of experience and quota. MAIN
resultsBoth indicators for intervention group were significantly greater than for control group (P<.0005), with a 95% confidence interval (2.5-4.7). The ratio of the percentage of cumulative increase of both variables between areas was 3.73 times higher after the intervention. No differences were found for the evaluated categories of physicians in the intervention group.
conclusionsIntervention strategies aimed at training and information, as well as monitoring health professionals, influence the pattern of prescription and can have an economic impact. Our results have not been influenced by the profile of the prescriber.
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.