Literature DB >> 19137281

Problem-oriented drug information: physicians' expectations and impact on clinical practice.

U Hedegaard1, P Damkier.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Problem-oriented drug information (POD) is a service in which health professionals provide evidence-based answers to clinical questions posed by physicians. The objective of this study was to evaluate the user satisfaction and clinical impact of POD, to investigate predictors for use and to examine the kind of sources physicians search before applying for POD.
METHODS: To evaluate POD, a questionnaire was distributed with problem-oriented answers sent from a drug information centre to physicians during the period of April 2006 to March 2007.
RESULTS: Of 197 questionnaires, 183 (93%) were returned. The information from the POD service was highly valued by the physicians, and 90% of the answers led to reported impact on clinical practice in the specific clinical situation. Furthermore, 74% of the answers were intended to be used in a wider context either for future patients (67%) or for dissemination to colleagues (51%). Secondary-care physicians more often than general practitioners (GPs) used the information for dissemination to colleagues (63 vs. 39%, P = 0.0008), while GPs more often used the answer to support patient information (88 vs. 70%, P = 0.0029). The most prominent motive for applying for POD was a request for evidence-based information (78%), and the service was used to overcome barriers to practicing evidence-based medicine such as lack of time (36%), skills for searching (26%), and appraising the literature (13%). Before inquiring, 74% of the physicians had tried other information sources; the most frequent sources used were a drug reference (68%) and consulting a colleague (24%). Secondary-care physicians reported fewer barriers than GPs when seeking information, and secondary-care physicians searched other sources more often than GPs before contacting the service (81 vs. 67%, P = 0.031).
CONCLUSION: POD represents a useful source for acquiring evidence-based drug information by physicians. POD is highly valued by the users. It was reported to have an impact on clinical practice for the specific patient but is also intended to be used in a wider context for future patients or for dissemination to colleagues. GPs' and secondary-care physicians' use of POD differs with GPs having more focus on patient information and secondary-care physicians having more focus on dissemination of the information to colleagues.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19137281     DOI: 10.1007/s00228-008-0604-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 0031-6970            Impact factor:   2.953


  28 in total

Review 1.  Knowledge management in clinical practice: a systematic review of information seeking behavior in physicians.

Authors:  Martin Dawes; Uchechukwu Sampson
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 4.046

2.  [Computer-assisted drug information].

Authors:  F Follath; C Meier; E Grimm
Journal:  Schweiz Med Wochenschr       Date:  1990-12-08

3.  Evidence-based databases versus primary medical literature: an in-house investigation on their optimal use.

Authors:  Taneya Y Koonce; Nunzia Bettinsoli Giuse; Pauline Todd
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2004-10

Review 4.  How do primary care physicians seek answers to clinical questions? A literature review.

Authors:  Herma C H Coumou; Frans J Meijman
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2006-01

5.  Randomized trial for answers to clinical questions: evaluating a pre-appraised versus a MEDLINE search protocol.

Authors:  Manesh R Patel; Connie M Schardt; Linda L Sanders; Sheri A Keitz
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2006-10

6.  Economic impact of a drug information service.

Authors:  D E Kinky; S C Erush; M S Laskin; G A Gibson
Journal:  Ann Pharmacother       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 3.154

7.  A clinical informaticist to support primary care decision making.

Authors:  D A Swinglehurst; M Pierce; J C Fuller
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2001-12

8.  Information needs in office practice: are they being met?

Authors:  D G Covell; G C Uman; P R Manning
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1985-10       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Physicians answer more clinical questions and change clinical decisions more often with synthesized evidence: a randomized trial in primary care.

Authors:  Brian S Alper; David S White; Bin Ge
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2005 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.166

10.  Effect of an evidence-based answering service on GPs and their patients: a pilot study.

Authors:  Anita A H Verhoeven; Jan Schuling
Journal:  Health Info Libr J       Date:  2004-09
View more
  10 in total

1.  Separating the wheat from the chaff: essential information in therapeutics.

Authors:  Roser Llop; Montse Bosch; Albert Figueras; Joan-Ramon Laporte
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2011-10-21       Impact factor: 2.953

2.  Drug interaction databases in medical literature: transparency of ownership, funding, classification algorithms, level of documentation, and staff qualifications. A systematic review.

Authors:  Gertrud Gansmo Kongsholm; Anna Katrine Toft Nielsen; Per Damkier
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 2.953

3.  Worldwide analysis of factors associated with medicines compendia publishing.

Authors:  Blanca Arguello; Fernando Fernandez-Llimos
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharm       Date:  2013-03-28

4.  Clinical pharmacology in everyday clinical care.

Authors:  Petra A Thürmann
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2013-05-03       Impact factor: 2.953

5.  A question-answer pair (QAP) database integrated with websites to answer complex questions submitted to the Regional Medicines Information and Pharmacovigilance Centres in Norway (RELIS): a descriptive study.

Authors:  Jan Schjøtt; Linda A Reppe; Pål-Didrik H Roland; Tone Westergren
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Quality assessment of structure and language elements of written responses given by seven Scandinavian drug information centres.

Authors:  Linda Amundstuen Reppe; Olav Spigset; Jens Peter Kampmann; Per Damkier; Hanne Rolighed Christensen; Ylva Böttiger; Jan Schjøtt
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2017-02-05       Impact factor: 2.953

7.  Drug information centre queries and responses about drug interactions over 10 years-A descriptive analysis.

Authors:  Carina Tukukino; Susanna M Wallerstedt
Journal:  Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol       Date:  2019-07-16       Impact factor: 4.080

8.  Factors associated with time consumption when answering drug-related queries to Scandinavian drug information centres: a multi-centre study.

Authors:  Linda Amundstuen Reppe; Olav Spigset; Ylva Böttiger; Hanne Rolighed Christensen; Jens Peter Kampmann; Per Damkier; Stian Lydersen; Jan Schjøtt
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2014-09-12       Impact factor: 2.953

9.  Assessment of Queries Received by the Drug Information Center at King Saud Medical City.

Authors:  Dlal Abdulrahman Almazrou; Sheraz Ali; Jasser Ali Alzhrani
Journal:  J Pharm Bioallied Sci       Date:  2017 Oct-Dec

10.  Use of References in Responses from Scandinavian Drug Information Centres.

Authors:  Jan Schjøtt; Ylva Böttiger; Per Damkier; Linda Amundstuen Reppe; Jens Peter Kampmann; Hanne Rolighed Christensen; Olav Spigset
Journal:  Medicines (Basel)       Date:  2018-07-01
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.