ArticleExploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy2024
Prescribers' perspectives: The impact of the controlled substance scheduling system on providing optimal patient care.
Article in Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy, 2024. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In the United States, the scheduling system for controlled substances was established by the Controlled Substance Act of 1970. In 2009, Parker et al. published the study "Physicians' knowledge and attitudes toward scheduling." Since 2009, the opioid epidemic has gathered national attention from social and scientific perspectives as the number of drug overdose deaths in the United States has nearly tripled. Objective: To follow up on a 2009 survey by Parker, et al. to determine prescribers' knowledge and attitudes regarding the controlled substance scheduling system and assess the impact of the controlled substance scheduling system on providing optimal patient care. Methods: The cross-sectional survey was designed to assess prescribers' attitudes and mailed to 400 randomly selected physicians and 400 randomly selected nurse practitioners. Results: Prescribers across all groups provided consistent responses suggesting an overall lack of understanding of controlled substance regulations, a negative attitude towards the controlled substance scheduling system, and a detrimental effect on providing optimal patient care. Responses from nurse practitioners differed significantly from physicians in 75 % (3 of the 4) questions regarding regulations, suggesting nurse practitioners possess a greater understanding of pharmaceutical regulations. Specialists' responses demonstrated an enhanced level of dissatisfaction regarding the controlled substance scheduling system compared to primary care providers in 75 % (3 of the 4) questions. Questions regarding the impact of the scheduling system on prescribing patterns differed significantly across multiple demographic groups, notably between physicians and nurse practitioners, differences in practice setting, and primary state of practice for 75 % (3 of the 4) questions. Conclusions: The results of this survey confirm the findings of Parker, et al., and further display the need for investigation into how to improve the controlled substance scheduling system in the United States.
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.