Healthy Skepticism Library item: 6478

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: Journal Article

Whelan AM, Nagpal S, Burge F.
Drug information resources in a family medicine residency training program
Canadian Pharmaceutical Journal 1994; 127:(9):39, 41-43, 46

Abstract:

This study was conducted to determine what types of drug information questions are asked in a family medicine residency training site, in which resources the answers are located, and to assess various characteristics of several drug information resources. Thirty-four of the 71 (47.2%) questionnaires distributed were returned and the data evaluated. An average of two to five questions concerning drugs arose in the daily practice of the respondents. The most commonly asked questions pertained to doses, most appropriate drug for a disease and adverse effects. The CPS, the most frequently used resource, rated highly as being available, and easy to use and understand; however, its information was not considered to be extensive. Reasons for not answering questions included lack of time and not knowing where to find the answer. Twenty physician-patient visits were observed during which 18 had at least one drug information question arise. Although the type of drug information sought was slightly different than that reported in the questionnaire the reasons for not answering questions were similar. The results of this study indicate that questions pertaining to drugs arise on a daily basis and currently the CPS is the most frequently used drug information source.

Keywords:
*analytic survey/Canada/source of information/ doctors/ family medicine centre/ Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and Specialties/ commercial compendia/ physicians in training/EVALUATION OF PROMOTION: COMMERCIAL DRUG COMPENDIA/PROMOTION AS A SOURCE OF INFORMATION: DOCTORS

Notes:

Methodology note: The health care professionals taking part in this survey all were from a single academic department of family medicine and may not be representative of professionals in other family medicine departments, other specialists and people working in the community. Only specific sources of information were examined in this survey. The response rate was 47% and nonresponders were not compared to responders. There is a possibility of a social acceptability bias in the responses. Due to the small number of participants it was impossible to determine if a true difference in types of drug information sought did exist. Results of the observation phase may be biased as more residents than physicians were observed. Not all physician-patient visits were observed as informed consent was not always granted.