ArticleResearch in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP2020
Perception of prescription drug monitoring programs as a prevention tool in primary medical care.
Article in Research in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Advances in prescription drug monitoring program research: a literature synthesis (June 2018 to December 2019).Current opinion in psychiatry · 2020Pooled it
- National Estimates and Physician-Reported Impacts of Prescription Drug Monitoring Program Use.Journal of general internal medicine · 2023Article
- "Nobody Knows How You're Supposed to Interpret it:" End-user Perspectives on Prescription Drug Monitoring Program in Massachusetts.Journal of addiction medicineArticle
- "1,000 conversations I'd rather have than that one:" A qualitative study of prescriber experiences with opioids and the impact of a prescription drug monitoring program.Journal of addictive diseasesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) are primary prevention tools to reduce substance use disorders (SUD) and sequelae. Evidence regarding perceptions of PDMPs from different primary care providers, which may impact PDMP utilization for women, is unavailable.
objectiveTo examine perceived PDMP effectiveness among obstetrician-gynecologists (OB/GYNs) compared to primary care physicians (PCPs).
methodsIndependent surveys of PDMP users in Florida, Kentucky, and California were evaluated based on a Likert-type item to assess perception of PDMP effectiveness in reducing prescription drug abuse and diversion. Response distributions of OB/GYNs versus PCPs were compared using chi-square tests.
resultsIn Florida, there were 41 OB/GYN and 511 PCP respondents; Kentucky, 46 OB/GYNs and 265 PCPs; and California, 41 OB/GYNs and 162 PCPs. In each state OB/GYNs viewed PDMPs as less effective, positive, or useful compared to PCPs (p ≤ 0.01, all states): Florida: 64.1% OB/GYN vs. 83.7% PCP "agree positive impact"; Kentucky: 45.0% OB/GYN vs. 68.5% PCP "effective". California: 73.2% OB/GYN vs. 86.4% PCP "useful".
conclusionsThese results suggest OB/GYNs view their state's PDMP as less effective than do PCPs, which may present barriers to PDMP utilization and decrease opportunities for SUD interventions. Engagement of all healthcare team members is needed to inform future strategies and policies to increase PDMP effectiveness.
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.