首页> 外文期刊>British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology >Cluster randomized trials of prescription medicines or prescribing policy: Public and general practitioner opinions in Scotland
【24h】

Cluster randomized trials of prescription medicines or prescribing policy: Public and general practitioner opinions in Scotland

机译:处方药或处方政策的随机分组试验:苏格兰的公共和全科医生意见

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

AIMS To understand public and general practitioner (GP) opinion on the acceptability of randomized policy design (RPD) studies (cluster randomized trials) of prescription medicines in Scotland. METHODS We surveyed public opinion on the concept of RPD studies in a sample of 1040 adults to determine acceptability and understand how people feel when changes are made to their medicines. We also surveyed GPs (n=1034) about the concept of RPD studies as a tool for improving understanding of comparative effectiveness and safety of medicines in the 'usual care' setting. RESULTS Thirty per cent of people would be happy to receive a letter about randomized policy changes to their therapy, 31% would not mind or had no opinion and 39% would be unhappy. This view was sensitive to the reason for change; effectiveness and safety reasons were most acceptable (96%) and cost saving least acceptable (39%). Only 19% thought randomized policy change was not an acceptable method of determining the best treatments. Eighty-one per cent of respondents were willing for their medical data to be followed up to compare drug treatments (further 10% undecided). Participants reporting long-term medical conditions and those reporting previous changes to drug therapy were more in favour of RPD studies than other participants. Thirty-three per cent (n=341) of GPs responded to our survey. Of these, 45% were in favour of RPD studies, 19% were undecided and 36% not in favour. CONCLUSIONS The public in Scotland is broadly supportive of the concept of randomized policy design studies of medicines, while there is a spread of opinion among GPs.
机译:目的了解公众和全科医生(GP)对苏格兰处方药的随机政策设计(RPD)研究(集群随机试验)的可接受性的意见。方法我们在1040名成年人中对RPD研究的概念进行了民意调查,以确定可接受性并了解人们对药物进行更改时的感觉。我们还调查了有关RPD研究概念的GP(n = 1034),RPD研究是一种工具,可用来增进对“常规护理”环境中药物的相对有效性和安全性的了解。结果30%的人会很乐意收到一封有关治疗政策随机变化的信,31%的人不介意或无意见,39%的人不满意。这种观点对变化的原因很敏感。有效性和安全性原因是最可以接受的(96%),而节省成本的原因最不可接受(39%)。只有19%的人认为随机改变政策不是确定最佳治疗方案的可接受方法。 81%的受访者愿意跟进他们的医疗数据以比较药物治疗(尚不确定的有10%)。与其他参与者相比,报告长期医学状况的参与者和报告先前药物治疗改变的参与者更喜欢RPD研究。 33%(n = 341)的全科医生回答了我们的调查。其中,有45%的人赞成RPD研究,有19%的人尚未决定,有36%的人不赞成。结论苏格兰的公众广泛支持药物的随机政策设计研究的概念,而全科医生对此也有不同的看法。

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