Cargando…

Cluster randomized trials of prescription medicines or prescribing policy: public and general practitioner opinions in Scotland

AIMS: To understand public and general practitioner (GP) opinion on the acceptability of randomized policy design (RPD) studies (cluster randomized trials) of prescription medicines in Scotland. METHODS: We surveyed public opinion on the concept of RPD studies in a sample of 1040 adults to determine...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mackenzie, Isla S., Wei, Li, Paterson, Kenneth R., MacDonald, Thomas M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3437468/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22288609
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.2012.04195.x
Descripción
Sumario:AIMS: To understand public and general practitioner (GP) opinion on the acceptability of randomized policy design (RPD) studies (cluster randomized trials) of prescription medicines in Scotland. METHODS: We surveyed public opinion on the concept of RPD studies in a sample of 1040 adults to determine acceptability and understand how people feel when changes are made to their medicines. We also surveyed GPs (n = 1034) about the concept of RPD studies as a tool for improving understanding of comparative effectiveness and safety of medicines in the ‘usual care’ setting. RESULTS: Thirty per cent of people would be happy to receive a letter about randomized policy changes to their therapy, 31% would not mind or had no opinion and 39% would be unhappy. This view was sensitive to the reason for change; effectiveness and safety reasons were most acceptable (96%) and cost saving least acceptable (39%). Only 19% thought randomized policy change was not an acceptable method of determining the best treatments. Eighty-one per cent of respondents were willing for their medical data to be followed up to compare drug treatments (further 10% undecided). Participants reporting long-term medical conditions and those reporting previous changes to drug therapy were more in favour of RPD studies than other participants. Thirty-three per cent (n = 341) of GPs responded to our survey. Of these, 45% were in favour of RPD studies, 19% were undecided and 36% not in favour. CONCLUSIONS: The public in Scotland is broadly supportive of the concept of randomized policy design studies of medicines, while there is a spread of opinion among GPs.