Shane P Stenner1, Qingxia Chen, Kevin B Johnson. 1. Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA. shane.stenner@vanderbilt.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of generic substitution decision support on electronic (e-) prescribing of generic medications. DESIGN: The authors analyzed retrospective outpatient e-prescribing data from an academic medical center and affiliated network for July 1, 2005-September 30, 2008 using an interrupted time-series design to assess the rate of generic prescribing before and after implementing generic substitution decision support. To assess background secular trends, e-prescribing was compared with a concurrent random sample of hand-generated prescriptions. MEASUREMENTS: Proportion of generic medications prescribed before and after the intervention, evaluated over time, and compared with a sample of prescriptions generated without e-prescribing. RESULTS: The proportion of generic medication prescriptions increased from 32.1% to 54.2% after the intervention (22.1% increase, 95% CI 21.9% to 22.3%), with no diminution in magnitude of improvement post-intervention. In the concurrent control group, increases in proportion of generic prescriptions (29.3% to 31.4% to 37.4% in the pre-intervention, post-intervention, and end-of-study periods, respectively) were not commensurate with the intervention. There was a larger change in generic prescribing rates among authorized prescribers (24.6%) than nurses (18.5%; adjusted OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.63). Two years after the intervention, the proportion of generic prescribing remained significantly higher for e-prescriptions (58.1%; 95% CI 57.5% to 58.7%) than for hand-generated prescriptions ordered at the same time (37.4%; 95% CI 34.9% to 39.9%) (p<0.0001). Generic prescribing increased significantly in every specialty. CONCLUSION: Implementation of generic substitution decision support was associated with dramatic and sustained improvements in the rate of outpatient generic e-prescribing across all specialties.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of generic substitution decision support on electronic (e-) prescribing of generic medications. DESIGN: The authors analyzed retrospective outpatient e-prescribing data from an academic medical center and affiliated network for July 1, 2005-September 30, 2008 using an interrupted time-series design to assess the rate of generic prescribing before and after implementing generic substitution decision support. To assess background secular trends, e-prescribing was compared with a concurrent random sample of hand-generated prescriptions. MEASUREMENTS: Proportion of generic medications prescribed before and after the intervention, evaluated over time, and compared with a sample of prescriptions generated without e-prescribing. RESULTS: The proportion of generic medication prescriptions increased from 32.1% to 54.2% after the intervention (22.1% increase, 95% CI 21.9% to 22.3%), with no diminution in magnitude of improvement post-intervention. In the concurrent control group, increases in proportion of generic prescriptions (29.3% to 31.4% to 37.4% in the pre-intervention, post-intervention, and end-of-study periods, respectively) were not commensurate with the intervention. There was a larger change in generic prescribing rates among authorized prescribers (24.6%) than nurses (18.5%; adjusted OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.63). Two years after the intervention, the proportion of generic prescribing remained significantly higher for e-prescriptions (58.1%; 95% CI 57.5% to 58.7%) than for hand-generated prescriptions ordered at the same time (37.4%; 95% CI 34.9% to 39.9%) (p<0.0001). Generic prescribing increased significantly in every specialty. CONCLUSION: Implementation of generic substitution decision support was associated with dramatic and sustained improvements in the rate of outpatient generic e-prescribing across all specialties.
Authors: Michael A Fischer; Christine Vogeli; Margaret Stedman; Timothy Ferris; M Alan Brookhart; Joel S Weissman Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2008-12-08
Authors: William H Shrank; Tuyen Hoang; Susan L Ettner; Peter A Glassman; Kavita Nair; Dee DeLapp; June Dirstine; Jerry Avorn; Steven M Asch Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2006-02-13
Authors: Jennifer N Howard; Ilene Harris; Gavriella Frank; Zippora Kiptanui; Jingjing Qian; Richard Hansen Journal: Res Social Adm Pharm Date: 2017-08-04
Authors: Shane P Stenner; Rohini Chakravarthy; Kevin B Johnson; William L Miller; Julie Olson; Marleen Wickizer; Nate N Johnson; Rick Ohmer; David R Uskavitch; Gordon R Bernard; Erin B Neal; Christoph U Lehmann Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2016-12-14 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Doyle M Cummings; Abraham J Letter; George Howard; Virginia J Howard; Monika M Safford; Valerie Prince; Paul Muntner Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2012-11-12 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Joshua M Pevnick; Ning Li; Steven M Asch; Cynthia A Jackevicius; Douglas S Bell Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2014-08-28 Impact factor: 2.796