Browsing by keyword "Physicians for Human Rights"
Now showing items 1-3 of 3
-
Dissemination of Evidence-Based Antipsychotic Prescribing Guidelines to Nursing Homes: A Cluster Randomized TrialOBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of efforts to translate and disseminate evidence-based guidelines about atypical antipsychotic use to nursing homes (NHs). DESIGN: Three-arm, cluster randomized trial. SETTING: NHs. PARTICIPANTS: NHs in the state of Connecticut. MEASUREMENTS: Evidence-based guidelines for atypical antipsychotic prescribing were translated into a toolkit targeting NH stakeholders, and 42 NHs were recruited and randomized to one of three toolkit dissemination strategies: mailed toolkit delivery (minimal intensity); mailed toolkit delivery with quarterly audit and feedback reports about facility-level antipsychotic prescribing (moderate intensity); and in-person toolkit delivery with academic detailing, on-site behavioral management training, and quarterly audit and feedback reports (high intensity). Outcomes were evaluated using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. RESULTS: Toolkit awareness of 30% (7/23) of leadership of low-intensity NHs, 54% (19/35) of moderate-intensity NHs, and 82% (18/22) of high-intensity NHs reflected adoption and implementation of the intervention. Highest levels of use and knowledge among direct care staff were reported in high-intensity NHs. Antipsychotic prescribing levels declined during the study period, but there were no statistically significant differences between study arms or from secular trends. CONCLUSION: RE-AIM indicators suggest some success in disseminating the toolkit and differences in reach, adoption, and implementation according to dissemination strategy but no measurable effect on antipsychotic prescribing trends. Further dissemination to external stakeholders such as psychiatry consultants and hospitals may be needed to influence antipsychotic prescribing for NH residents.
-
Long acting contraception provision by rural primary care physiciansOBJECTIVES: Unplanned pregnancy is a public health problem in the United States, including in rural areas. Primary care physicians are the main providers of health care to women in rural areas and are uniquely positioned to help reduce unplanned pregnancy in rural women. This study documents provision of contraception by rural primary care physicians, focusing on the most effective, long acting methods, intrauterine devices (IUDs) and contraceptive implants. METHODS: We surveyed all primary care physicians practicing in rural areas of Illinois and Wisconsin. Bivariate analysis was performed using chi squared and Fisher's exact test, and multivariable analysis was performed with logistic regression to determine factors associated with provision. RESULTS: The response rate was 862 out of 2312 physicians (37%). Nine percent of respondents place implants and 35% place IUDs. Eighty-seven percent of physicians had not had training in implant placement, and 41% had not had training in IUD placement. In multivariable analysis, factors associated with placement of long acting contraception include provision of maternity care, and female gender of the physician. The most common reasons for not providing the methods were lack of training and perceived low demand from patients. CONCLUSIONS: Many rural primary care providers do not place long acting contraceptive devices due to lack of training. Female physicians and those providing maternity care are the most likely to place these devices. Increased training for primary care physicians both during and after residency would help increase access to these options for women in rural areas.
-
Variation in long-term antipsychotic polypharmacy and high-dose prescribing across physicians and hospitalsOBJECTIVES: This study had two aims: to measure the prevalence of long-term prescribing of high doses of antipsychotics and antipsychotic polypharmacy in a large Canadian province and to estimate the relative contributions of patient-, physician-, and hospital-level factors. METHODS: Government hospital discharge, physician, and pharmaceutical claims data were linked to identify individuals with schizophrenia who in 2004 had antipsychotics available to them for at least 11 months. Individuals on a high dose throughout that period, as well as individuals on multiple concurrent antipsychotics (polypharmacy), were identified. Logistic and generalized linear mixed models using patient-, physician-, and hospital-level predictors were estimated. RESULTS: Among the 12,150 individuals identified, 11.9% were on a high dose and 10.4% on antipsychotic polypharmacy continually, with 3.7% in both groups. After adjustment for potential confounders, analyses showed that systematic propensity for physicians to prescribe high doses accounted for 10.9% of the remaining unexplained variance, and physicians as a group who prescribed high doses across a hospital or psychiatry department accounted for 3.0%. For antipsychotic polypharmacy the corresponding percentages were 9.7% and 6.2%. Even after adjustment, the variation in high-dose prescribing and antipsychotic polypharmacy remained substantial. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term high-dose and antipsychotic polypharmacy prescribing appeared partly driven by some physicians' and some hospitals' propensities to prescribe in this way independently of patient characteristics. Given the weight of the evidence against high-dose prescribing and antipsychotic polypharmacy, measures addressed to physicians and hospitals most likely to prescribe high doses, antipsychotic polypharmacy, or both should be considered.