ArticlePain medicine (Malden, Mass.)2022
Understanding State-Level Variations in Implementing Academic Detailing for Prescribing Opioids: Findings from 11 States Within the United States.
Article in Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAcademic detailing is a clinical education technique characterized by targeted, one-on-one, interactive conversations between trained staff and the clinician. This study describes variations in implementing academic detailing among jurisdictions receiving funding from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to prevent prescription drug overdoses.
designIn 2015, CDC started the Prescription Drug Overdose Prevention for States (PfS) program. SUBJECTS: This study focuses on 11 of the 29 funded jurisdictions that implemented academic detailing as part of their PfS efforts.
methodsJurisdictions provided annual progress reports from 2016 to 2019. We conducted semistructured interviews in 2017 and 2018 with all funded jurisdictions and conducted follow-up interviews with three jurisdictions in 2020 to obtain additional context. We used an analytic matrix display to identify themes from annual progress report data, the coding report from the 2017/2018 interviews, and the three follow-up interviews from 2020.
resultsTwo academic detailing models emerged: 1) one-on-one detailing, where centrally trained staff conducted all visits, and 2) a train-the-trainer model. Jurisdictions also described a hybrid model, which they referred to as academic detailing despite not meeting the definition of academic detailing. We identified variations in delivery strategies, staffing, and curriculum development within and between models. Despite these differences, common themes included the need to use data to focus academic detailing and the importance of partnerships.
conclusionsAdoption of academic detailing as a strategy for improving opioid prescribing behaviors has increased. However, there is limited guidance and standardization to guide and evaluate implementation and outcomes.
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.