Dataset Information

Pharmaceutical companies information and antibiotic prescription patterns: A follow-up study in Spanish primary care.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:To assess the impact of sources of drug information on antibiotic prescribing patterns (quantity and quality) among primary care physicians. METHODS:We conducted a cohort study on primary care physicians who were actively engaged in medical practice in 2010 in a region in north-west Spain (Galicia), fulfilling inclusion criteria (n = 2100). As the independent variable, we took the perceived utility of 6 sources of information on antibiotics, as measured by the validated KAAR-11 questionnaire. As dependent variables, we used: (1) a quality indicator (appropriate quality, defined as any case where 6 of the 12 indicators proposed by the European Surveillance of Antimicrobial Consumption Network [ESAC-Net] were better than the mean values for Spain); and, (2) a quantity indicator (high prescribing), defined as any case where defined daily doses (DDD) per 1 000 inhabitants per day of antibacterials for systemic use were higher than the mean values for Spain. The adjusted odds ratio for a change in the interquartile range (IqOR) for each sources of information on antibiotics was calculated using Generalized Linear Mixed Models. RESULTS:The questionnaire response rate was 68%. Greater perceived utility of pharmaceutical sales representatives increases the risk of having high prescribing (1/IqOR = 2.50 [95%CI: 1.63-3.66]) and reduces the probability of having appropriate quality (1/IqOR = 2.28 [95%CI: 1.77-3.01]). Greater perceived utility of clinical guidelines increases the probability of having appropriate quality (1/IqOR = 1.25 [95%CI: 1.02-1.54]) and reduces the probability of high prescribing (1/IqOR = 1.25 [95%CI: 1.02-1.54]). CONCLUSIONS:Sources of information on antibiotics are an important determinant of the quantity and quality of antibiotic prescribing in primary care. Commercial sources of information influence prescribing negatively, and clinical guidelines are associated with better indicators.

SUBMITTER: Fernandez-Alvarez I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6706057 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Pharmaceutical companies information and antibiotic prescription patterns: A follow-up study in Spanish primary care.

Fernández-Álvarez Iria I Zapata-Cachafeiro Maruxa M Vázquez-Lago Juan J López-Vázquez Paula P Piñeiro-Lamas María M García Rodríguez Raquel R Figueiras Adolfo A

PloS one 20190822 8

<h4>Objectives</h4>To assess the impact of sources of drug information on antibiotic prescribing patterns (quantity and quality) among primary care physicians.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a cohort study on primary care physicians who were actively engaged in medical practice in 2010 in a region in north-west Spain (Galicia), fulfilling inclusion criteria (n = 2100). As the independent variable, we took the perceived utility of 6 sources of information on antibiotics, as measured by the validated ...[more]

PMID: 31437201

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSocial media has become one of the primary information sources for medical professionals and patients. Pharmaceutical companies are committed to using various social media platforms to provide stakeholders with digital medical information services (DMISs), which remain experimental and immature. In China, WeChat tops the list of popular social media platforms. To date, little is known about the service model of DMISs delivered by pharmaceutical companies via WeChat.ObjectiveThis study aims to explore the emerging service model of DMISs delivered by pharmaceutical companies via WeChat in China.MethodsThis study applied a qualitative research design combining case study and documentary analysis to explore the DMISs of 6 leading pharmaceutical companies in China. Materials were collected from their official WeChat platforms. Thematic analysis was conducted on the data.ResultsThe DMISs of 6 pharmaceutical companies were investigated. Themes emerged regarding 2 essential information services delivered by pharmaceutical companies via WeChat: business operation services and DMISs (ie, public information services, professional services, science and education services, and e-commerce services). Business operation services mainly function to assist or facilitate the company's operations and development trends for general visitors. Public-oriented information services are realized through health science popularization, academic frontiers, product information, and road maps to hospitals and pharmacies. Internet hospital and pharmacy services are the main patient-oriented professional services. Medical staff-oriented science and education services commonly include continuing education, clinical assistance, academic research, and journal searching. Public-oriented e-commerce services include health products and health insurance.ConclusionsPharmaceutical companies in China use WeChat to provide stakeholders with diversified DMISs, which remain in the exploratory stage. The service model of DMISs requires more distinct innovations to provide personalized digital health and patient-centric services. Moreover, specific regulations on the DMISs of pharmaceutical companies need to be established to guard public health interests.

Project description:Uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTI) are common in primary care. Whilst primary care physicians are called to be antimicrobial stewards, there is limited primary care antibiotic resistance surveillance and physician antibiotic prescription data available in southern Chinese primary care. The study aimed to investigate the antibiotic resistance rate and antibiotic prescription patterns in female patients with uncomplicated UTI. Factors associated with antibiotic resistance and prescription was explored. A prospective cohort study was conducted in 12 primary care group clinics in Hong Kong of patients presenting with symptoms of uncomplicated UTI from January 2012 to December 2013. Patients' characteristics such as age, comorbidity, presenting symptoms and prior antibiotic use were recorded by physicians, as well as any empirical antibiotic prescription given at presentation. Urine samples were collected to test for antibiotic resistance of uropathogens. Univariate analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with antibiotic resistance and prescription. A total of 298 patients were included in the study. E. coli was detected in 107 (76%) out of the 141 positive urine samples. Antibiotic resistance rates of E. coli isolates for ampicillin, co-trimoxazole, ciprofloxacin, amoxicillin and nitrofurantoin were 59.8%, 31.8%, 23.4%, 1.9% and 0.9% respectively. E. coli isolates were sensitive to nitrofurantoin (98.1%) followed by amoxicillin (78.5%). The overall physician antibiotic prescription rate was 82.2%. Amoxicillin (39.6%) and nitrofurantoin (28.6%) were the most common prescribed antibiotics. Meanwhile, whilst physicians in public primary care prescribed more amoxicillin (OR: 2.84, 95% CI: 1.67 to 4.85, P<0.001) and nitrofurantoin (OR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.14 to 3.55, P = 0.015), physicians in private clinics prescribed more cefuroxime and ciprofloxacin (P<0.05). Matching of antibiotic prescription and antibiotic sensitivity of E. coli isolates occurred in public than private primary care prescriptions (OR: 6.72, 95% CI: 2.07 to 21.80 P = 0.001) and for other uropathogens (OR: 6.19, 95% CI: 1.04 to 36.78 P = 0.034). Mismatching differences of antibiotic prescription and resistance were not evident. In conclusion, nitrofurantoin and amoxicillin should be used as first line antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated UTI. There were significant differences in antibiotic prescription patterns between public and private primary care. Public primary care practitioners were more likely to prescribe first line antibiotic treatment which match antibiotic sensitivity of E. coli isolates and other uropathogens. Further exploration of physician prescribing behaviour and educational interventions, particularly in private primary care may helpful. Meanwhile, development and dissemination of guidelines for primary care management of uncomplicated UTI as well as continued surveillance of antibiotic resistance and physician antibiotic prescription is recommended.

Project description:Importance:Understanding the profitability of pharmaceutical companies is essential to formulating evidence-based policies to reduce drug costs while maintaining the industry's ability to innovate and provide essential medicines. Objective:To compare the profitability of large pharmaceutical companies with other large companies. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cross-sectional study compared the annual profits of 35 large pharmaceutical companies with 357 companies in the S&P 500 Index from 2000 to 2018 using information from annual financial reports. A statistically significant differential profit margin favoring pharmaceutical companies was evidence of greater profitability. Exposures:Large pharmaceutical vs nonpharmaceutical companies. Main Outcomes and Measures:The main outcomes were revenue and 3 measures of annual profit: gross profit (revenue minus the cost of goods sold); earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA; pretax profit from core business activities); and net income, also referred to as earnings (difference between all revenues and expenses). Profit measures are described as cumulative for all companies from 2000 to 2018 or annual profit as a fraction of revenue (margin). Results:From 2000 to 2018, 35 large pharmaceutical companies reported cumulative revenue of $11.5 trillion, gross profit of $8.6 trillion, EBITDA of $3.7 trillion, and net income of $1.9 trillion, while 357 S&P 500 companies reported cumulative revenue of $130.5 trillion, gross profit of $42.1 trillion, EBITDA of $22.8 trillion, and net income of $9.4 trillion. In bivariable regression models, the median annual profit margins of pharmaceutical companies were significantly greater than those of S&P 500 companies (gross profit margin: 76.5% vs 37.4%; difference, 39.1% [95% CI, 32.5%-45.7%]; P?<?.001; EBITDA margin: 29.4% vs 19%; difference, 10.4% [95% CI, 7.1%-13.7%]; P?<?.001; net income margin: 13.8% vs 7.7%; difference, 6.1% [95% CI, 2.5%-9.7%]; P?<?.001). The differences were smaller in regression models controlling for company size and year and when considering only companies reporting research and development expense (gross profit margin: difference, 30.5% [95% CI, 20.9%-40.1%]; P?<?.001; EBITDA margin: difference, 9.2% [95% CI, 5.2%-13.2%]; P?<?.001; net income margin: difference, 3.6% [95% CI, 0.011%-7.2%]; P?=?.05). Conclusions and Relevance:From 2000 to 2018, the profitability of large pharmaceutical companies was significantly greater than other large, public companies, but the difference was less pronounced when considering company size, year, or research and development expense. Data on the profitability of large pharmaceutical companies may be relevant to formulating evidence-based policies to make medicines more affordable.

Project description:BackgroundPharmaceutical companies spent $57.5 billion on pharmaceutical promotion in the United States in 2004. The industry claims that promotion provides scientific and educational information to physicians. While some evidence indicates that promotion may adversely influence prescribing, physicians hold a wide range of views about pharmaceutical promotion. The objective of this review is to examine the relationship between exposure to information from pharmaceutical companies and the quality, quantity, and cost of physicians' prescribing.Methods and findingsWe searched for studies of physicians with prescribing rights who were exposed to information from pharmaceutical companies (promotional or otherwise). Exposures included pharmaceutical sales representative visits, journal advertisements, attendance at pharmaceutical sponsored meetings, mailed information, prescribing software, and participation in sponsored clinical trials. The outcomes measured were quality, quantity, and cost of physicians' prescribing. We searched Medline (1966 to February 2008), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970 to February 2008), Embase (1997 to February 2008), Current Contents (2001 to 2008), and Central (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2007) using the search terms developed with an expert librarian. Additionally, we reviewed reference lists and contacted experts and pharmaceutical companies for information. Randomized and observational studies evaluating information from pharmaceutical companies and measures of physicians' prescribing were independently appraised for methodological quality by two authors. Studies were excluded where insufficient study information precluded appraisal. The full text of 255 articles was retrieved from electronic databases (7,185 studies) and other sources (138 studies). Articles were then excluded because they did not fulfil inclusion criteria (179) or quality appraisal criteria (18), leaving 58 included studies with 87 distinct analyses. Data were extracted independently by two authors and a narrative synthesis performed following the MOOSE guidelines. Of the set of studies examining prescribing quality outcomes, five found associations between exposure to pharmaceutical company information and lower quality prescribing, four did not detect an association, and one found associations with lower and higher quality prescribing. 38 included studies found associations between exposure and higher frequency of prescribing and 13 did not detect an association. Five included studies found evidence for association with higher costs, four found no association, and one found an association with lower costs. The narrative synthesis finding of variable results was supported by a meta-analysis of studies of prescribing frequency that found significant heterogeneity. The observational nature of most included studies is the main limitation of this review.ConclusionsWith rare exceptions, studies of exposure to information provided directly by pharmaceutical companies have found associations with higher prescribing frequency, higher costs, or lower prescribing quality or have not found significant associations. We did not find evidence of net improvements in prescribing, but the available literature does not exclude the possibility that prescribing may sometimes be improved. Still, we recommend that practitioners follow the precautionary principle and thus avoid exposure to information from pharmaceutical companies. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Dataset Information

Pharmaceutical companies information and antibiotic prescription patterns: A follow-up study in Spanish primary care.

Publications

Pharmaceutical companies information and antibiotic prescription patterns: A follow-up study in Spanish primary care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets