| Literature DB >> 31856821 |
Xin Zhou1, Xueting Zhang1, Linsheng Yang2, Xu Hu1, Aizong Shen3, Xiaohui Huang1, Xuefeng Xie4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To explore the key factors affecting prescription practices of essential medicines in Chinese county hospital. National essential medicine policy (NEMP) plays important roles in health care system, especially in developing countries. As a fundamental component in the Chinese health system reform, NEMP was implemented in primary health care institutions during the first stage of reform. As it is rolled out, priority usage and zero-mark-up policy of essential medicines are to be applied in every government-run healthcare institution. However, the intention and influence factors of physicians on priority selecting essential medicine remains unclear.Entities:
Keywords: Essential medicine; Health care system reform; Prescription behavior; Rational administration
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31856821 PMCID: PMC6923978 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-019-4831-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Health Serv Res ISSN: 1472-6963 Impact factor: 2.655
Fig. 1Research model of the key factors influencing the priority usage of essential medicines
Demographics and relevant characteristics of participants (n = 282)
| Variables | Mean | Standard deviation |
|---|---|---|
| Age | 34.92 | 7.79 |
| Years of practice | 11.07 | 8.64 |
| Number | Percent | |
| Gender | ||
| male | 201 | 71.28 |
| female | 82 | 28.72 |
| Education level | ||
| Associate degree and below | 40 | 14.19 |
| Bachelor’s degree | 229 | 81.21 |
| Master’s/Doctoral degree | 13 | 4.60 |
| Current position | ||
| Junior physician | 135 | 47.87 |
| Physician-in-charge | 120 | 42.55 |
| Deputy chief/ chief physician | 27 | 9.58 |
| Work role/department | ||
| Internal Medicine | 82 | 29.08 |
| Surgery | 79 | 28.01 |
| Obstetrics and Gynecology | 35 | 12.41 |
| Pediatrics | 26 | 9.22 |
| Others | 60 | 21.28 |
Others include Ophthalmology, Otorhinolaryngology and ICU etc
Goodness of fit of the models
| RMR | GFI | AGFI | PGFI | RMSEA | df | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attitude towards behavior | 0.018 | 0.999 | 0.989 | 0.100 | 0.000 | 0.617 | 1 | 0.432 |
| Subjective Norms | 0.070 | 0.984 | 0.945 | 0.281 | 0.069 | 13.973 | 6 | 0.030 |
| Perceived behavioral control | 0.032 | 0.993 | 0.978 | 0.331 | 0.019 | 5.513 | 5 | 0.357 |
| Behavior Intention | 0.020 | 0.997 | 0.981 | 0.133 | 0.000 | 1.813 | 2 | 0.404 |
| Behavior | 0.063 | 0.990 | 0.970 | 0.330 | 0.029 | 8.667 | 7 | 0.277 |
RMR Root Mean square Residual, GFI Goodness-of-fit index, AGFI Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index, PGFI Parsimony Goodness of Fit Index, RMSEA Root mean square error of approximation
Survey statements and categorical confirmatory factor analysis (n = 282)
| Latent variable | Observable indicators | Standardized coefficient | Standard error | Cronbach’s α |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attitude towards behavior (AB) | AB1 Awareness of the EM system | 0.60 | 0.36 | 0.755 |
| AB2 Satisfaction of the EM system | 0.89 | 0.49 | ||
| AB3 Satisfaction of the job statue | 0.62 | 0.38 | ||
| AB4 Change of your income | 0.46 | 0.21 | ||
| Subjective Norms (SNs) | SN1 Hospitals give publicity to the EM system | 0.83 | 0.39 | 0.807 |
| SN2 Application of hospital formulary | 0.87 | 0.45 | ||
| SN3 Incentive measures made by hospitals | 0.49 | 0.24 | ||
| SN4 Effects on the prescription review system | 0.62 | 0.38 | ||
| SN5 Patients would like to make decisions on choosing medicines | 0.39 | 0.15 | ||
| SN6 Frequency of talking about EM to patients | 0.52 | 0.27 | ||
| Perceived behavioral control (PBC) | PBC1 Physician’s knowledge and skills to the EML | 0.72 | 0.42 | 0.774 |
| PBC2 Access to EM information | 0.82 | 0.38 | ||
| PBC3 Awareness of the EM price | 0.79 | 0.33 | ||
| PBC4 Recognition of the quality of EM | 0.73 | 0.44 | ||
| PBC5 Provision of EM in hospital pharmacy | 0.54 | 0.29 | ||
| Behavior Intention (BI) | BI1 Intention to participate in training | 0.71 | 0.50 | 0.882 |
| BI2 Intention to active learning about EM | 0.88 | 0.37 | ||
| BI3 Intention to prescribe EM preferentially | 0.87 | 0.36 | ||
| BI4 Necessary support for implementing EM system in hospital | 0.77 | 0.29 | ||
| BI5 Necessary support for implementing zero-markup policy of medicines | 0.62 | 0.38 | ||
| Behavior (B) | B1 Frequency of participating in training | 0.51 | 0.26 | 0.735 |
| B2 Enthusiasm of learning about EM | 0.61 | 0.37 | ||
| B3 Recommend EM to patients | 0.84 | 0.30 | ||
| B4 Actual behavior of prescribing EM preferentially | 0.63 | 0.20 | ||
| B5 Implementation of performance evaluation in hospitals | 0.32 | 0.10 | ||
| B6 Weight on the DUR in performance evaluation system | 0.35 | 0.12 |
EM essential medicine, EML essential medicine list, DUR drug utilization review, AB Attitude towards behavior, SNs Subjective Norms, PBC Perceived behavioral control, BI Behavior Intention, B Behavior
Fig. 2Structural equation model of key factors of priority in the prescription of essential medicines
Path coefficients of physicians prescribing essential medicine
| Path | Path coefficient | t value | Hypothesis | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attitude → intention to prescribe EM | 0.68 | 5.36* | H1 | Supported |
| Subjective norms → intention to prescribe EM | 0.56 | 2.19* | H2 | Supported |
| Perceived behavior control → intention to prescribe EM | 0.79 | 7.16* | H3 | Supported |
| Perceived behavior control →Behavior | 0.24 | 1.37 | H4 | Not Supported |
| intention to prescribe EM → Behavior | 0.70 | 6.84* | H5 | Supported |
EM essential medicine
*P<0.01