Are Drug Safety Advisories Compatible with Physicians’ Information Behaviour?

M. Møllebæk, S. Kaae
{"title":"Are Drug Safety Advisories Compatible with Physicians’ Information Behaviour?","authors":"M. Møllebæk, S. Kaae","doi":"10.47368/ejhc.2022.301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Physicians critically depend on up-to-date risk information when prescribing drugs, but they typically have little time to navigate the vast information. In the European Union, Direct to Healthcare Professional Communications (DHPC) letters are distributed to physicians to mitigate drug risks that emerge after market approval, but the letters show low impact. This study characterises general practitioners’ (GPs) information behaviour regarding drug safety and assesses the compatibility of DHPCs with the identified information behaviour. We conducted 17 semi-structured interviews and four follow-up interviews with Danish GPs about safety concerns and analysed them using Wilson’s model of information behaviour. We found that GPs primarily use an online drug monograph for point-of-care information needs and a newsletter from the authorities for clinical management strategies. They generally did not consider DHPCs a useful source of information. GPs argued that numerous sources contained the same information as the DHPC and believed these to be superior in terms of convenience, clinical relevance, and quality of evidence. A new digital mode of DHPC delivery from a public authority may improve the general adoption but also generated new problems. Overall, this suggests that DHPCs in their current form are not very compatible with information behaviour of GPs.","PeriodicalId":358828,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Communication","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Health Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2022.301","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Physicians critically depend on up-to-date risk information when prescribing drugs, but they typically have little time to navigate the vast information. In the European Union, Direct to Healthcare Professional Communications (DHPC) letters are distributed to physicians to mitigate drug risks that emerge after market approval, but the letters show low impact. This study characterises general practitioners’ (GPs) information behaviour regarding drug safety and assesses the compatibility of DHPCs with the identified information behaviour. We conducted 17 semi-structured interviews and four follow-up interviews with Danish GPs about safety concerns and analysed them using Wilson’s model of information behaviour. We found that GPs primarily use an online drug monograph for point-of-care information needs and a newsletter from the authorities for clinical management strategies. They generally did not consider DHPCs a useful source of information. GPs argued that numerous sources contained the same information as the DHPC and believed these to be superior in terms of convenience, clinical relevance, and quality of evidence. A new digital mode of DHPC delivery from a public authority may improve the general adoption but also generated new problems. Overall, this suggests that DHPCs in their current form are not very compatible with information behaviour of GPs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
药物安全咨询与医生的信息行为一致吗?
医生在开处方时主要依赖于最新的风险信息,但他们通常没有时间浏览大量信息。在欧盟,直接致医疗保健专业沟通(DHPC)信件被分发给医生,以减轻市场批准后出现的药物风险,但这些信件的影响不大。本研究表征了全科医生(gp)关于药物安全的信息行为,并评估了dhpc与确定的信息行为的兼容性。我们对丹麦全科医生进行了17次关于安全问题的半结构化访谈和4次后续访谈,并使用威尔逊的信息行为模型对其进行了分析。我们发现全科医生主要使用在线药物专论来满足护理点信息需求,并使用权威机构的通讯来提供临床管理策略。他们一般不认为dhpc是有用的信息来源。全科医生认为,许多来源包含与DHPC相同的信息,并认为这些信息在便利性、临床相关性和证据质量方面更优越。公共机构提供DHPC的一种新的数字模式可能会提高普及程度,但也会产生新的问题。总的来说,这表明当前形式的dhpc与全科医生的信息行为不太兼容。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Twitter, Politics, and the Pandemic When Online and Offline Environments Meet Examining the Impact of Six Pro-Vaccination Messages on MMR Vaccine Hesitancy Among Mothers in Ukraine Would You Mind Sharing Your Opinion About the Covid-19 Vaccination? Issue Fatigue Over the Course of the Covid-19 Pandemic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1