Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Changing Prescribing in the Light of Tolerability Concerns

How is This Best Achieved?

  • Current Opinion
  • Published:
Drug Safety Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite our knowledge regarding the efficacy, tolerability and optimal use of drugs, suboptimal prescribing still occurs. In view of all the factors that influence prescribing, this is not surprising. The focus of drug tolerability has changed from ‘choosing the best alternative’ when a drug is prescribed, to a balanced decision incorporating various different treatments from separate healthcare providers. This article reviews strategies that may influence prescribing behaviour and discusses practical considerations for achieving optimal prescribing in view of tolerability concerns.

The patient has a major influence on prescribing and, with the current diversification of healthcare, the patient now controls prescribing behaviour more than ever before. Communication between healthcare providers consequently assumes a vital role. If messages are to be coherent and transferable, it is increasingly important that healthcare workers communicate effectively with one another rgarding patients, prescribing patterns, and drug tolerability issues.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jick H, Derby LE, Myers MW, et al. Risk of hospital admission for idiopathic venous thromboembolism among users of postmenopausal oestrogens. Lancet 1996; 348(9033): 981–3

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Spitzer WO, Lewis MA, Heinemann LA, et al. Third generation oral contraceptives and risk of venous thromboembolic disorders: an international case-control study. BMJ 1996; 7023: 83–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Co-trimoxazole use restricted. Drug Ther Bull 1995; 33: 92–3

  4. Ad hoc subcommittee of the Liaison Committee of the World Health Organisation and the International Society of Hypertension. Effects of calcium antagonists on the risks of coronary heart disease, cancer and bleeding. Hypertension Res 1997; 20(2): 61–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Crane J, Pearce N, Flatt A, et al. Prescribed fenoterol and death from asthma in New Zealand, 1981–83: case-control study. Lancet 1989; I: 917–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Spitzer WO, Suissa S, Ernst P, et al. The use of β-agonists and the risk of death and near death from asthma. N Engl J Med 1992; 326(8): 501–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Nelson HS. New Developments in bronchodilator therapy. Curr Opin Pulm Med 1996; 2(1): 35–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Freemantle N, Harvey EL, Wolf F, et al. Printed educational materials: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library: issue 2. Oxford; Update Software, 1999

    Google Scholar 

  9. de Vries CS, van den Berg PB, de Jong-van den Berg LTW. Oral contraceptive prescribing before and after the pill scare: changes in OC use and how users change. Contraception 1998; 57: 247–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Britten N, Ukoumunne O. The influence of patients’ hopes of receiving a prescription on doctors’ perceptions and the decision to prescribe: a questionnaire survey. BMJ 1997; 315(7121): 1506–10

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Freemantle N, Bloor K. Lessons from international experience in controlling pharmaceutical expenditure: I: influencing patients. BMJ 1996; 312(7044): 1469–71

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Sackett DL, Haines RB, editors. Compliance with therapeutic regimens. Baltimore (MD): The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cramer JA. Compliance with oral contraceptives and other treatments. Obstet Gynecol 1996; 88 (3 Suppl.): 4S–12S

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Mustard CA, Mayer T. Case-control study to medication and the risk of injurious falls requiring hospitalisation among nursing home residents. Am J Epidemiol 1997; 145(8): 738–45

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Morgan K, Clarke D. Longitudinal trends in late-life insomnia: implications for prescribing. Age Ageing 1997; 26(3): 179–84

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hamm RM, Hicks RJ, Bemben DA. Antibiotics and respiratory infections: do antibiotic prescriptions improve outcomes? J Okla State Med Assoc 1996; 89(8): 267–74

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Kumar PJ, Clark ML. Clinical medicine. 2nd ed. London: Balliere Tindall, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  18. Monane M, Monane S, Semla T. Optimal medication use in elders: key to successful aging. West J Med 1997; 167(4): 233–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Beers MH. Explicit criteria for determining potentially inappropriate medication use by the elderly: an update. Arch Intern Med 1997; 157: 1531–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Yamreudeewong W, Johnson JV, Cassidy TG, et al. Comparison of two methods for INR determination in a pharmacist-based oral anticoagulation clinic. Pharmacotherapy 1996; 16(6): 1159–65

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hawley CJ, Quick SJ, Harding MJ, et al. A preliminary study to examine the adequacy of long-term treatment of depression and the extent of recovery in general practice. Br J Gen Pract 1997; 47: 233–4

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Carlson JE. Perils of polypharmacy: 10 steps to prudent prescribing. Geriatrics 1996; 51(7): 26–30, 35

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Soumerai SB, McLaughlin TJ, Avorn J. Improving drug prescribing in primary care: a critical analysis of the experimental literature. Milbank Q 1989; 67: 268–317

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Mugford M, Banfield P, O’Hanlon M. Effects of feedback of information on clinical practice: a review. BMJ 1991; 303(6799): 398–402

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Cunningham G, Dodd TR, Grant DJ, et al. Drug-related problems in elderly patients admitted to Tayside hospitals, methods for prevention and subsequent reassessment. Age Ageing 1997; 26(5): 375–82

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Sturkenboom MCJM, de Jong-van den Berg LTW, Cornel MC, et al. Communicating a drug alert: a case study on acitretin in the Netherlands. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1994; 47: 125–32

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Denig P, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM, Zijsling DH. Impact of a drug bulletin on knowledge, perception of drug utility, and prescribing behaviour of physicians. DICP 1990; 24: 87–93

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, 1990. Section 1927 GH of the Social Security Act (public law 101508)

  29. Soumerai SB, Lipton HL. Computer-based drug utilisation review —risk, benefit, or boondoggle? N Engl J Med 1995; 332(24): 1641–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Donald JB. On line prescribing by computer. BMJ 1986; 292: 937–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Wyatt J, Walton R. Computer based prescribing. BMJ 1995; 311: 1181–2

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Stockley IH. Computerised automatic warnings about drug interactions are now available. BMJ 1997; 314: 303

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Walton RT, Gierl C, Yudkin P, et al. Evaluation of computer support for prescribing (CAPSULE) using simulated cases. BMJ 1997; 315: 791–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Stoner NS, Tanfield CJ, Talbot DC. Computerised prescribing of chemotherapy reduces errors. BMJ 1996; 312: 707

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. McDonald CJ, Hui SL, Smith DM, et al. Reminders to physicians from an introspective medical record: a two-year randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 1984; 100: 130–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Roland MO, Zander LI, Evans M, et al. Evaluation of a computer assisted repeat prescribing programme in a general practice. BMJ 1985; 291: 456–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Hekster Y, Buurma H, Leufkens HGM, et al. Drug consumption in the Netherlands: vol. II. Groningen; Styx Publications 1997

    Google Scholar 

  38. de Vries CS. Collaboration in healthcare — the tango to drug safety [dissertation]. Groningen; University of Groningen, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  39. Purves IN. Guidelines for GPs are being tested. BMJ 1996; 312: 1112–3

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Purves IN. Prodigy research team: prodigy interim report. Prodigy Publn 1996; 24: 19

    Google Scholar 

  41. Avorn J, Soumerai SB. Improving drug-therapy decisions through educational outreach. N Engl J Med 1983; 308: 1457–63

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Schaffner W, Ray WA, Federspiel CF, et al. Improving antibiotic prescribing in office practice: a controlled trial of three educational methods. JAMA 1983; 250: 1728–32

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. May F, Gilbert A, Hurley E, et al. A drug and therapeutics information service for community medical practitioners. Aust Prescriber 1993; 16: 49–51

    Google Scholar 

  44. Braybrook S, Walker R. Influencing prescribing in primary care: a comparison of two different prescribing feedback methods. J Clin Pharm Ther 1996; 21: 247–54

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Harris CM. Better feedback on prescribing for general practitioners. BMJ 1994; 309: 356

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Thomson MA, Oxman AD, Davis DA, et al. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library: issue 2. Update Software, 1999

  47. Braybrook S. Rationalising prescribing in primary care: impact of different outreach strategies [dissertation]. Cardiff University, 1996

  48. Mason M, Wood J, Freemantle N. Designing evaluations of interventions to change professional practice. J Health Serv Res Policy 1999: 4; 106–11

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Soumerai SB, Avorn J. Economic and policy analysis of university-based drug detailing. Med Care 1986; 24: 313–31

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Avorn J, Soumerai SB, Everitt DE, et al. Arandomised trial of a program to reduce the use of psychoactive drugs in nursing homes. N Engl J Med 1992; 327: 168–73

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Jennett PA, Laxdal OE, Hayton RC, et al. The effects of continuing medical education on family doctor performance in office practice: a randomized control study. Med Educ 1988; 22: 139–45

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Davis DA, Thomson MA, Oxman AD, et al. Evidence for the effectiveness of CME: a review of 50 randomized controlled trials. JAMA 1992; 268: 1111–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Anderson Jr FA, Wheeler HB, Goldberg RJ, et al. Changing clinical practice. Prospective study of the impact of continuing medical education and quality assurance programs on use of prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154: 669–77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Santoso B. Small group intervention vs formal seminar for improving appropriate drug use. Soc Sci Med 1996; 42(8): 1163–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Baert AE, Baig SS, Bardoux C. Effects of group auditing on improving drug therapy in primary care: a randomized controlled trial. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 1995: 22–3

    Google Scholar 

  56. Virji A, Britten N. A study of the relationship between patients’ attitudes and doctors’ prescribing. Fam Pract 1991; 8: 314–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Webb S, Lloyd M. Prescribing and referral in general practice: a study of patients’ expectations and doctors actions. Br J Gen Pract 1994; 44: 165–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Schwartz RK, Soumerai SB, Avorn J. Physician motivation for non-scientific drug prescribing. Soc Sci Med 1989; 28: 577–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Sleath B, Svarstadt B, Roter D. Physician vs patient initiation of psychotropic prescribing in primary care settings: a content analysis of audiotapes. Soc Sci Med 1997; 44(4): 541–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. de Vries CS, van Diepen NM, Tromp TFJ, et al. Auditing GPs’ prescribing habits: cardiovascular medication frequently continues prescribing initiated by specialists. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1996; 50: 349–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Carretero MD, Chiswick A, Cataln J. Whose health is it?: the views of injecting drug users with HIV infection and their professional carers. AIDS Care 1998; 10(3): 323–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. McCormick J. Flourishing process-foundering care. Br J Gen Pract 1992; 42: 493

    Google Scholar 

  63. Marsh GN. Efficient care in general practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  64. Balint M. The collusion of anonymity. In: Balint M, editor. The doctor, his patient, and the illness. Tunbridge Wells: Pitman Medical, 1964: 60–80

    Google Scholar 

  65. Bradley CP, Taylor RJ, Blenkinsopp A. Developing prescribing in primary care. BMJ 1997; 314: 744–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Bradley M. The role of the practice pharmacist — the new member of the team. VFM Update 1996; 2: 27–8

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social Pharmacy and Pharmacoepidemiology, University Centre for Pharmacy, Groningen University Institute for Drug Exploration, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Corrine S. de Vries, Theodoras F. J. Tromp & Lolkje T. W. de Jong-van den Berg

  2. Centre for Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy, University of London, London, England

    Catherine A. Duggan

Authors
  1. Corrine S. de Vries
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Catherine A. Duggan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Theodoras F. J. Tromp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lolkje T. W. de Jong-van den Berg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

de Vries, C.S., Duggan, C.A., Tromp, T.F.J. et al. Changing Prescribing in the Light of Tolerability Concerns. Drug-Safety 21, 153–160 (1999). https://doi.org/10.2165/00002018-199921030-00001

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00002018-199921030-00001

Keywords

Search

Navigation