4.5 Article

Medication Palatability Affects Physician Prescribing Preferences for Common Pediatric Conditions

期刊

ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE
卷 23, 期 11, 页码 1243-1247

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/acem.13020

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to determine if physicians would alter their prescribing preferences after sampling liquid formulations of medications for common pediatric diagnoses. MethodsThis was a prospective interventional before/after study conducted at an academic medical center in the United States. The participants of interest included emergency, family medicine, and pediatric physicians. Participants initially completed a brief survey for their primary oral liquid medication of choice for the treatment of selected disease states. These included otitis media, sinusitis, cellulitis, asthma, colitis, and pneumonia. Participants were asked to choose one of the medication options for each disease and then were given all medications to sample for a taste test. The prescribing preference survey was then repeated. The primary outcome was change in prescribing. McNemar's test was used to evaluate change in proportion of medications chosen before and after taste testing. ResultsThere were 101 physicians who participated in the study. There were three conditions for which participants changed their prescribing preferences significantly. These were otitis media (change from amoxicillin to cefdinir, difference = 13.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.5% to 21.0%), asthma exacerbation (change from dexamethasone or prednisone to prednisolone, 28%, 95% CI = 15.9% to 40.1%), and pneumonia (change from azithromycin to amoxicillin, 16.0%, 95% CI = 6.4% to 25.6%). There was no significant change with respect to the other scenarios. ConclusionsPhysicians showed preferences for certain pediatric medications based on taste and showed significant changes in prescribing preferences for some common pediatric diagnoses after tasting different medications for these conditions.

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