J Korean Med Assoc.  2004 Feb;47(2):144-149. 10.5124/jkma.2004.47.2.144.

eEfforts to Improve Physicians Prescription in Developed Countries

• Bae JM

• KMID: 1936469
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5124/jkma.2004.47.2.144

Abstract

S +nce errors in prescription potentially result in serious outcomes but can be prevented by multiple interventions, it is very important to update the knowledge on medicines and to improve physicians' prescription for medication safety. The aim of this article is to review useful interventions to improve prescription in developed countries. The passive dissemination of drug information or clinical practice guide-lines alone is an insufficient method for improving most pre-scribing behaviors, although necessary. While the concurrent drug utilization review (DUR) could reduce inappropriate drug prescription and help physicians' prescribing decisions, retrospective DUR and penalties should not be operated in order to hold down the cost of medication.

Keyword

Drug; Prescriptions; Drug utilization review

MeSH Terms

Developed Countries*
Drug Prescriptions
Drug Utilization Review
Prescriptions*
Retrospective Studies

Reference

1. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, editors. . To error is human: building a safer health system. 1999. Washington DC: National Academy Press.

2. Bates DW, Cullen DJ, Laird N, Petersen LA, Small SD, Servi D, et al. Incidence of adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events:implications for prevention. JAMA. 1995. 274:29–34.

3. Ernst FR, Grizzle AJ. Drug-related morbidity and mortality:updating the cost-of-illness model. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2001. 41:192–199.

4. Leape LL, Bates DW, Cullen DJ, Cooper J, Demonaco HJ, Gallivan T, et al. Systems analysis of adverse drug events. JAMA. 1995. 274:35–43.

5. Soumerai SB, Ross-Degan D, Spira J. The effects of professional and media warnings about the association between aspirin use in children and Reye's syndrome. Milbank Q. 1992. 70:155–182.

6. Soumerai SB, Majumdar S, Lipton HL. Strom BL, editor. Evaluating and improving physician prescribing. Phamacoepidemiology. 2000. 3rd ed. London: John Wiley & Sons, LTD;483–503.

7. Ross-Degnan D, Soumerai SB, Fortess EE, Gurwitz J. Examining product risk in context: market withdrawal of zomepirac sodium as a case study. JAMA. 1993. 270:1937–1942.

8. Burgers JS, Grol R, Klazinga NS, Makela M, Zaat J. AGREE Collaboration. Towards evidence-based clinical practice: an international survey of 18 clinical guideline programs. Int J Qual Health Care. 2003. 15:31–45.

9. Gilli R, Penna A, Zola P, Liberati A. Physicians' view of practice guidelines. A survey of Italian physicians. Soc Sci Med. 1996. 43:1283–1287.

11. Klein LE, Charache P, Johannes RS. Effect of physician tutorials on prescribing patterns of graduate physicians. J Med Educ. 1981. 56:504–511.

13. Eisenberg JM. Doctor's decisions and the cost of medical care. 1986. Ann Arbor: Health Administration Press Perspectives.

14. Hennessy S, Bilker WB, Zhou L, Weber AL, Brensinger C, Wang Y, et al. Retrospective drug utilization review, prescribing errors, and clinical outcomes. JAMA. 2003. 290:1494–1499.

15. Soumerai SB, Lipton HL. Computer based drug utilization review-risk, benfit, or boondoggle? New Engl J Med. 1995. 332:1641–1644.

16. Schiff GD, Rucker TD. Computerized prescribing. Building the electronic infrastructure for better medication usage. JAMA. 1998. 279:1024–1029.

17. Monane M, Matthias DM, Nagle BA, Kelly MA. Improving prescribing patterns for the elderly through an online drug utilization review intervention. A system linking the physician, pharmacist, and computer. JAMA. 1998. 280:1249–1252.

18. Greco PJ, Eisenberg JM. Changing physicians' practices. New Engl J Med. 1993. 329:1271–1274.