Systematic Review of Interventions to Improve Prescribing

Abstract

Educational outreach as well as audit and feedback continue to dominate research into prescribing interventions. These 2 prescribing interventions also most consistently show positive results. Much less research is conducted into other types of interventions and there is still very little effort to systematically test why interventions do or do not work.

The determinants of export performance: a review of the literature 2006-2014

“…While meta-analysis is considered to be statistically superior than vote-counting (Combs et al, 2011), vote-counting is criticized for being too conservative and overlooking the magnitude of effect size (Ostini et al, 2009). However, the interpretability of the results of meta-analysis is dependent on the degree of measurement consensus (Newbert et al, 2014), and given the fact that disparate measures are used by researchers, the results from a meta-analysis "are difficult or impossible to interpret" (Newbert et al, 2014: 147).…”

Development and Delivery of a Quality Improvement Program to Reduce Antipsychotic Polytherapy

“…[31][32][33][34] However, an educational program was considered by the study authors to be crucial to this quality improvement program for several reasons, including the need to (a) open a dialogue regarding goals and concerns with the quality improvement program, (b) address the evidence base supporting the quality improvement program, (c) obtain clinician "buy-in" for the program, and (d) allow nurses and psychiatrists access to the same information regarding the purpose and methods of the quality improvement program. A pharmacist who is board certified in psychiatric pharmacy practice worked as part of the interdisciplinary team to develop and deliver the education.…”

Expectations for consultations and antibiotics for respiratory tract infection in primary care: the RTI clinical iceberg

“…8 In contrast, multifaceted interventions are generally more successful, especially if based on behaviour change theory to address with GPs the importance of antibiotic resistance and its relationship to use, and if they also provide tools to facilitate behaviour change in both patients and clinicians. [9][10][11][12][13] Although the illness iceberg has been described, 14 GPs may prescribe antibiotics unnecessarily to the majority of patients presenting with RTIs, 15 moreover patients who are prescribed antibiotics for RTI have a history of high consultation behaviour and re-attendance. 16 Antibiotic prescribing decisions should take individual patient perspectives into account; and good data on the patients journey through their RTI illness should help inform GPs' management and the further development and roll-out of multifaceted interventions.…”