4.5 Article

Beliefs about generic drugs among elderly adults in hospital-based primary care practices

期刊

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
卷 73, 期 2, 页码 377-383

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.012

关键词

Generic drugs; Beliefs; Elderly; Low-income; Access to care

资金

  1. Robert Wood Johnson Generalist Physician Faculty Scholars Program Award
  2. National Institute on Aging
  3. American Federation for Aging Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: This Study aimed to characterize seniors' belief's about generic drugs, and examine potential correlates of these beliefs, including socioeconomic and health Status variables, health literacy, and physician communication skills. Methods: Older adults (>= 65 years) were interviewed in two primary care practices of an inner-city, tertiary care hospital (n = 311). Beliefs about generics were measured using a scale that compared generic and brand name drugs across four domains. Beliefs were modeled with multivariable linear regression. Results: Negative beliefs about generics were associated with non-white race (p < 0.0001), lower education (p = 0.008) and income (p = 0.001), and having Medicaid coverage (p = 0.001). Individuals with low health literacy and who reported that their physicians had poor communication skills were more likely to hold negative views (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.003, respectively). In multivariable analysis, black race (beta = -2.30. p = 0.006) and inadequate health literacy (beta = -2.17, p = 0.0004) remained strongly associated with negative views about generic drugs. Poor physician communication skills also predicted negative beliefs about generics but the association was not significant for all levels of communication skill. Conclusion: Many low-income seniors mistrust generic medications, especially African-Americans and seniors with low health literacy. Practice implications: Educational efforts to promote generic medications should account for patients' health literacy and Cultural backgrounds. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据