...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of public health medicine >Is untargeted outreach visiting in primary care effective? A pragmatic randomized controlled trial.
【24h】

Is untargeted outreach visiting in primary care effective? A pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

机译:在初级保健中进行非针对性的外展访问是否有效?实用的随机对照试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence that clinical guidelines can lead to improvements in clinical care. However, they are not self-implementing. Outreach visits may improve prescribing behaviour. METHODS: Within a before-and-after pragmatic randomized controlled trial, involving all general practices in one health district, routine methods were used to distribute guidelines for management of Helicobacter pylori eradication. Intervention practices were offered a visit and the conduct of an audit by a pharmacist trained in the techniques of outreach visiting. The intervention was evaluated using level three Prescribing Analysis and Cost (PACT) data for metronidazole and omeprazole for the two 12 month periods around the introduction of the guidelines. RESULTS: Of the 38 intervention practices 19 accepted an outreach visit and three accepted the offer of an audit. There was a significant increase in omeprazole use during the study of 0.24 [95 per cent confidence interval (CI) +0.19 to +0.29] dose units per year but no effect from the offer [-0.02 (95 per cent CI -0.12 to +0.08) dose units] or acceptance of a visit [-0.03 (95 per cent CI -0.15 to +0.08) dose units]. The results for metronidazole were similar, with an increase in use of 0.028 (95 per cent CI +0.018 to +0.038) dose units per year. The effect of the intervention was a non-significant change in prescribing of -0.005 (95 per cent CI -0.025 to +0.015) dose units. Accepting a visit had little effect on prescribing: a change of 0.003 (95 per cent CI -0.021 to +0.027) dose units. CONCLUSIONS: The routine use of untargeted outreach visiting is probably not a worthwhile strategy.
机译:背景:越来越多的证据表明,临床指南可以改善临床护理。但是,它们不是自我实现的。外展访问可能会改善处方行为。方法:在一项涉及实用性卫生区所有常规操作的实用性随机对照试验前后,采用常规方法分发了根除幽门螺杆菌的管理指南。接受了干预实践的访问,并由经过外展访问技术培训的药剂师进行了审核。在实施指南前后的两个12个月内,使用甲硝唑和奥美拉唑的三级处方分析和成本(PACT)数据对干预进行了评估。结果:在38种干预措施中,有19种接受了外展访问,有3种接受了审计提议。在研究期间,奥美拉唑的使用量每年显着增加,为0.24 [95%置信区间(CI)+0.19至+0.29]剂量单位,但报价无影响[-0.02(95%CI -0.12至+ 0.08)剂量单位]或接受就诊[-0.03(95%CI -0.15至+0.08)剂量单位]。甲硝唑的结果相似,每年使用0.028(95%CI +0.018至+0.038)剂量单位。干预的效果是-0.005(95%CI -0.025至+0.015)剂量单位的处方无显着变化。接受拜访对开处方几乎没有影响:将剂量单位更改为0.003(95%CI -0.021至+0.027)。结论:常规使用无目标的外展访问可能不是一个值得的策略。

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