...
首页> 外文期刊>JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association >An educational intervention to improve physician reporting of adverse drug reactions: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.
【24h】

An educational intervention to improve physician reporting of adverse drug reactions: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

机译:一种提高医师对药物不良反应的报告的教育干预措施:一项整群随机对照试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

CONTEXT: Data on the adverse effects of newly marketed drugs are limited. Voluntary reporting is an important part of postmarketing surveillance but is underused by physicians. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of educational outreach visits for improving adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting by physicians. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cluster-randomized controlled trial covering all National Health System physicians in the north of Portugal, with intervention in March 2004 through July 2004, and 13 to 16 months of follow-up. A total of 1388 physicians were assigned in 4 spatial clusters to the intervention group, and 5063 were assigned in 11 clusters to the control group. INTERVENTION: One-hour educational outreach visits tailored to training needs identified in a previous study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in total number of reported ADRs and number of serious, high-causality, unexpected, and new-drug-related ADRs, using generalized linear mixed models adjusted for baseline ADR reporting, age, specialty, and work setting. RESULTS: At baseline, ADR reporting rates (per 1000 physician-years) did not differ significantly between the intervention groups and the control groups in reporting ADRs overall (7.6 vs 11.3), nor did they differ significantly by category: serious, 4.3 vs 6.0; high-causality, 5.4 vs 7.6; unexpected, 1.6 vs 3.5; and new-drug-related ADRs, 3.7 vs 3.8. (P>.05 for all comparisons). The control group had no significant increase in ADR reports during follow-up. The adjusted increase in ADR reporting rates attributable to intervention was 90.19 for total ADRs (95% confidence interval [CI], 54.51-125.87; relative risk [RR], 10.23; 95% CI, 3.81-27.51), 30.16 for serious ADRs (95% CI, 18.84-41.47; RR, 6.32; 95% CI, 2.09-19.16), 64.90 for high-causality ADRs (95% CI, 38.38-91.42; RR, 8.75; 95% CI, 3.05-25.07), 28.04 for unexpected ADRs (95% CI, 16.25-39.83; RR, 30.21; 95% CI, 4.54-200.84), and 42.17 for new-drug-related ADRs (95% CI, 21.58-62.76; RR, 8.05; 95% CI, 2.10 -30.83). The greatest difference occurred during the first 4 months after intervention, but differences remained statistically significant for 12 months. CONCLUSION: A targeted outreach program may improve high-quality reporting of ADRs among physicians.
机译:背景:关于新上市药物不良反应的数据有限。自愿报告是上市后监督的重要组成部分,但未被医生使用。目的:评估教育外访对改善医师报告不良药物反应(ADR)的有效性。设计,地点和参与者:一项整群随机对照试验,覆盖葡萄牙北部的所有国家卫生系统医生,于2004年3月至2004年7月进行了干预,并进行了13至16个月的随访。总共将1388名医生按4个空间组分配给干预组,将5063名按11个组分配给对照组。干预:针对之前研究中确定的培训需求量身定制的一小时教育外展访问。主要观察指标:使用针对基线ADR报告,年龄,专长和工作环境调整的广义线性混合模型,报告的ADR总数以及严重,高因果,意外和与新药相关的ADR数量发生变化。结果:基线时,干预组和对照组的总体ADR报告率(7.6 vs 11.3)在基线水平上,干预组和对照组之间的ADR报告率(每1000个医生-年)没有显着差异,严重程度分别为4.3 vs 6.0 ;高因果关系,分别为5.4和7.6;出乎意料,1.6对3.5;以及与新药相关的ADR,分别为3.7和3.8。 (对于所有比较,P> .05)。随访期间,对照组的不良反应报告没有显着增加。对于全部ADR,调整后的归因于干预的ADR报告率增加为90.19(95%置信区间[CI]为54.51-125.87;相对风险[RR]为10.23; 95%CI为3.81-27.51),严重ADR为30.16(高因果关系ADR的95%CI,18.84-41.47; RR,6.32; 95%CI,2.09-19.16),64.90(95%CI,38.38-91.42; RR,8.75; 95%CI,3.05-25.07),28.04出乎意料的ADR(95%CI,16.25-39.83; RR,30.21; 95%CI,4.54-200.84),和42.17(新药相关ADR)(95%CI,21.58-62.76; RR,8.05; 95%CI ,2.10 -30.83)。最大的差异发生在干预后的前4个月,但差异在12个月内仍具有统计学意义。结论:有针对性的外展计划可能会提高医师对ADR的高质量报告。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号