Academic Detailing Interventions and Evidence-Based Prescribing: A Systematic Review.

IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL JAMA Network Open Pub Date : 2025-01-02 DOI:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53684
Benjamin N Rome, Ellen Dancel, Alexander Chaitoff, Dominick Trombetta, Shuvro Roy, Paul Fanikos, Jayda Germain, Jerry Avorn
{"title":"Academic Detailing Interventions and Evidence-Based Prescribing: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Benjamin N Rome, Ellen Dancel, Alexander Chaitoff, Dominick Trombetta, Shuvro Roy, Paul Fanikos, Jayda Germain, Jerry Avorn","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53684","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Academic detailing (interactive educational outreach) is a widely used strategy to encourage evidence-based prescribing by clinicians.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate academic detailing programs targeted at improving prescribing behavior and describe program aspects associated with positive outcomes.</p><p><strong>Evidence review: </strong>A systematic search of MEDLINE from April 1, 2007, through December 31, 2022, was performed for randomized trials and nonrandomized studies of academic detailing interventions to improve prescribing. Academic detailing was defined as evidence-based medication education outreach delivered interactively to individuals or small groups of prescribers. Only studies that measured prescribing outcomes were included. Two investigators independently assessed studies for risk of bias using validated assessment tools. Among all studies rated as having low risk of bias and randomized trials rated as having moderate risk of bias, the absolute change in the proportion of patients using the targeted medications and the proportion of studies that led to significant changes in 1 or more prescribing outcome were determined. The data analysis was performed between January 25, 2022, and November 4, 2024.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The 118 studies identified varied by setting (eg, inpatient, outpatient) and academic detailing delivery (eg, individual vs groups of prescribers). The most common therapeutic targets were antibiotic overuse (32 studies [27%]), opioid prescribing (24 studies [20%]), and management of mental health conditions (16 studies [14%]) and cardiovascular disease (13 studies [11%]). Most studies (66 [56%]) combined academic detailing with other interventions (eg, audit and feedback, electronic health record reminders). Among 36 studies deemed to have the lowest risk of bias, 18 interventions (50%; 95% CI, 33%-67%) led to significant improvements in all prescribing outcomes, and 7 (19%; 95% CI, 8%-36%) led to significant improvements in 1 or more prescribing outcomes. The median absolute change in the proportion of patients using the targeted medication or medications was 4.0% (IQR, 0.3%-11.3%) in the intended direction.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this systematic review of academic detailing interventions addressing evidence-based prescribing, most interventions led to substantial changes in prescribing behavior, although the quality of evidence varied. These findings support the use of academic detailing to bring about more evidence-based prescribing in a variety of clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 1","pages":"e2453684"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Network Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53684","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Academic detailing (interactive educational outreach) is a widely used strategy to encourage evidence-based prescribing by clinicians.

Objective: To evaluate academic detailing programs targeted at improving prescribing behavior and describe program aspects associated with positive outcomes.

Evidence review: A systematic search of MEDLINE from April 1, 2007, through December 31, 2022, was performed for randomized trials and nonrandomized studies of academic detailing interventions to improve prescribing. Academic detailing was defined as evidence-based medication education outreach delivered interactively to individuals or small groups of prescribers. Only studies that measured prescribing outcomes were included. Two investigators independently assessed studies for risk of bias using validated assessment tools. Among all studies rated as having low risk of bias and randomized trials rated as having moderate risk of bias, the absolute change in the proportion of patients using the targeted medications and the proportion of studies that led to significant changes in 1 or more prescribing outcome were determined. The data analysis was performed between January 25, 2022, and November 4, 2024.

Findings: The 118 studies identified varied by setting (eg, inpatient, outpatient) and academic detailing delivery (eg, individual vs groups of prescribers). The most common therapeutic targets were antibiotic overuse (32 studies [27%]), opioid prescribing (24 studies [20%]), and management of mental health conditions (16 studies [14%]) and cardiovascular disease (13 studies [11%]). Most studies (66 [56%]) combined academic detailing with other interventions (eg, audit and feedback, electronic health record reminders). Among 36 studies deemed to have the lowest risk of bias, 18 interventions (50%; 95% CI, 33%-67%) led to significant improvements in all prescribing outcomes, and 7 (19%; 95% CI, 8%-36%) led to significant improvements in 1 or more prescribing outcomes. The median absolute change in the proportion of patients using the targeted medication or medications was 4.0% (IQR, 0.3%-11.3%) in the intended direction.

Conclusions and relevance: In this systematic review of academic detailing interventions addressing evidence-based prescribing, most interventions led to substantial changes in prescribing behavior, although the quality of evidence varied. These findings support the use of academic detailing to bring about more evidence-based prescribing in a variety of clinical settings.

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
学术详细干预和循证处方:系统回顾。
重要性:学术细节(互动教育外展)是一种广泛使用的策略,以鼓励临床医生以证据为基础开处方。目的:评估旨在改善处方行为的学术详细计划,并描述与积极结果相关的计划方面。证据回顾:从2007年4月1日至2022年12月31日,对MEDLINE进行了系统检索,对学术详细干预措施改善处方进行了随机试验和非随机研究。学术细节被定义为以证据为基础的药物教育推广,以互动的方式向个人或一小群处方者提供。仅包括测量处方结果的研究。两名研究者使用经过验证的评估工具独立评估了研究的偏倚风险。在所有被评为低偏倚风险的研究和被评为中等偏倚风险的随机试验中,确定了使用靶向药物的患者比例的绝对变化,以及导致1个或多个处方结局发生显著变化的研究比例。数据分析在2022年1月25日至2024年11月4日之间进行。发现:118项研究因环境(例如,住院患者,门诊患者)和学术细节交付(例如,个人与处方者群体)而异。最常见的治疗目标是抗生素过度使用(32项研究[27%]),阿片类药物处方(24项研究[20%]),以及精神健康状况(16项研究[14%])和心血管疾病(13项研究[11%])的管理。大多数研究(66项[56%])将学术细节与其他干预措施(例如,审计和反馈、电子健康记录提醒)结合起来。在36项被认为具有最低偏倚风险的研究中,18项干预措施(50%;95% CI, 33%-67%)导致所有处方结果显著改善,7例(19%;95% CI, 8%-36%)导致1个或多个处方结果的显著改善。使用靶向药物或药物的患者比例在预期方向上的绝对变化中位数为4.0% (IQR, 0.3%-11.3%)。结论和相关性:在这篇针对循证处方的学术详细干预措施的系统综述中,尽管证据的质量各不相同,但大多数干预措施导致了处方行为的实质性改变。这些发现支持使用学术细节在各种临床环境中带来更多基于证据的处方。
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
JAMA Network Open
JAMA Network Open Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
16.00
自引率
2.90%
发文量
2126
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: JAMA Network Open, a member of the esteemed JAMA Network, stands as an international, peer-reviewed, open-access general medical journal.The publication is dedicated to disseminating research across various health disciplines and countries, encompassing clinical care, innovation in health care, health policy, and global health. JAMA Network Open caters to clinicians, investigators, and policymakers, providing a platform for valuable insights and advancements in the medical field. As part of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed general medical and specialty publications, JAMA Network Open contributes to the collective knowledge and understanding within the medical community.
期刊最新文献
JAMA Network Open. Lipoprotein a Testing Patterns in the Veterans Health Administration. Parent-Targeted Oral Health Text Messaging for Underserved Children Attending Pediatric Clinics: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Prevalence of Dementia Among US Adults With Autism Spectrum Disorder. Recombinant vs Egg-Based Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccination for Nursing Home Residents: A Cluster Randomized Trial.
×
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