...
首页> 外文期刊>JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association >How conducting a clinical trial affects physicians' guideline adherence and drug preferences.
【24h】

How conducting a clinical trial affects physicians' guideline adherence and drug preferences.

机译:进行临床试验如何影响医生的指南依从性和药物偏爱。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

CONTEXT: General practitioners are frequently involved in clinical trials sponsored by pharmaceutical companies but the effects of participation on their prescribing patterns have not been evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To determine how conducting a company-sponsored clinical trial influenced physicians' adherence to international treatment recommendations and their prescribing of the pharmaceutical company's drugs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Observational cohort study in Funen County, Denmark, comparing 10 practices that were conducting a trial on asthma medicine with 165 control (non-trial-conducting) practices. The study population included 5439 patients treated with asthma drugs from the trial-conducting practices and 59,574 patients from the control practices. Practices conducted the trial between April 26, 2001, and October 7, 2002. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Adherence to guidelines measured as use of inhaled corticosteroids among asthma patients. Prevalence of use of the company's drugs and the trial sponsor's share of the total volume of asthma drugs prescribed. RESULTS: The baseline proportion of asthma patients using inhaled corticosteroids was 68.5% in trial-conducting and 69.1% in control practices. Conducting the trial did not influence guideline adherence (odds ratio [OR] after 2 years, 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84-1.19). In trial-conducting practices, the sponsoring company's share of the total prescribed volume of asthma drugs increased compared with control practices (6.7%; 95% CI, 3.0%-11.7%). This could be attributed to a significantly higher preference for the company's inhaled corticosteroids (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.04-1.54) and trends toward increased prescribing of the company's other asthma drugs. CONCLUSION: Conducting a trial sponsored by a pharmaceutical company had no significant impact on physicians' adherence to international treatment recommendations but increased their use of the trial sponsor's drugs.
机译:背景:全科医生经常参与制药公司赞助的临床试验,但尚未评估参与对其处方模式的影响。目的:确定进行公司赞助的临床试验如何影响医师对国际治疗建议的遵守以及他们对制药公司药物的处方。设计,地点和患者:在丹麦Funen县进行的观察性队列研究,比较了进行哮喘药物试验的10种方法与165种对照(非试验性方法)方法。研究人群包括5439例从进行试验的实践中接受哮喘药物治疗的患者和59574例从对照进行的实践中接受治疗的患者。实践在2001年4月26日至2002年10月7日期间进行了试验。主要观察指标:遵守哮喘患者吸入皮质类固醇的使用指南。公司药物的使用率和试验赞助者在处方哮喘药物总量中的份额。结果:在进行试验的过程中,使用吸入糖皮质激素治疗的哮喘患者的基线比例为68.5%,在对照实践中为69.1%。进行该试验不会影响指南的依从性(2年后的赔率[OR]为1.00; 95%置信区间[CI]为0.84-1.19)。在进行试验的实践中,与对照组相比,赞助公司在哮喘处方药总量中的份额有所增加(6.7%; 95%CI,3.0%-11.7%)。这可能是由于该公司对吸入的糖皮质激素的偏爱明显更高(OR为1.26; 95%CI为1.04-1.54),以及该公司其他哮喘药物处方的增加趋势。结论:进行由制药公司赞助的试验不会对医生遵守国际治疗建议产生重大影响,但会增加他们对试验赞助人药物的使用。

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