Rationalising prescribing: Evidence, marketing and practice-relevant knowledge

The pharmacist as safety net: an interview-based study of the intersecting dependencies between doctors and pharmacists

BACKGROUND

Social science research has demonstrated how health practitioners negotiate and contest professional roles and jurisdictions in practice, and in ways that reflect the power dynamics that permeate medicine. This article further explores these relational dynamics by examining how general practitioners (GPs) in Aotearoa New Zealand frame their working relationships with pharmacists.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 16 GPs from around the country. Interviews had a mean duration of 46 min, and were thematically analysed.

RESULTS

GPs saw and used pharmacists as a key source of information about both medicines and patients; thus it was not only pharmacists' training and expertise, but also their community setting and patient proximity, that made them a useful resource to doctors. Furthermore, GPs framed pharmacists as a critical 'safety net' due to their role in catching errors and checking prescribing details. The pharmacy 'safety net' also came through in participants' comments on discount pharmacies, which have introduced pronounced cost-cutting logics to Aotearoa New Zealand's pharmaceutical landscape; in their reflections on these organisations, prescribers express the importance of robust pharmacy practice to their own work.

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst the literature often foregrounds tensions in how health providers reinscribe their professional roles, this research highlights the interdependence that doctors identify with pharmacists, and their aspirations for working together. Both professional groups navigate a pressed health system that presents a set of common challenges to good medicines practice.

Good conduct in a context of rationing: A case study of how frontline professionals deal with distributive dilemmas of novel gene therapies

Classical dilemmas of how to distribute limited resources have been rekindled by the rise of advanced, high-cost therapies. Building on a case study of a novel gene therapy in neuropaediatric care, this article explores the dilemmas that explicit priority setting can create for frontline professionals and develops a typology of professionals' responses to these dilemmas. Despite political attempts to centralise priority setting and spare health professionals from having to consider treatment costs at the 'bedside', this study shows that concern for economic efficiency and budget control nonetheless need to be handled and balanced against other accountabilities in the daily work of frontline professionals. Contributing to the sociological debate on priority setting and rationing, this study develops an analytical perspective attuned to the relational aspects of frontline work and the challenges related to the balancing of diverging ideas of good conduct. Further, focussing on an empirical field at the forefront of genomic medicine, this study brings the sociological debate on priority setting and rationing up to date with current developments in precision medicine.

Prescribing as affective clinical practice: Transformations in sexual health consultations through HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis

New medicines can transform routines and priorities in clinical practice, but how do clinicians think and feel about these changes, and how does it affect their work? In Australia, the HIV prevention regimen pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been rapidly rolled out, transforming the sexual cultures and practices of users, but less attention has been given to the ways PrEP has reconfigured clinical practice. This paper draws on 28 qualitative semi-structured interviews conducted between 2019 and 2020 with PrEP-providing doctors and nurses in Australia to consider how they have affectively engaged with PrEP and put it into practice. Through a reflexive thematic analysis, we explore how clinicians adapted to PrEP, how the field of HIV prevention has been transformed, and how these developments have changed how clinicians approach patients. While the introduction of PrEP was initially received with uncertainty and shock, clinicians described PrEP as enjoyable to prescribe, and better aligned with the moral duties of sexual health consultations than existing HIV prevention strategies like condoms. Through approaching clinical work as an 'affective practice', we argue for attending not only to how new interventions change expectations and practices, but also how these changes are felt and valued by clinicians.

Disentangling prescribing behaviour of Cypriot physicians, within a complex framework of interacting

The purpose of the study is to investigate how physicians' prescribing behaviour in Cyprus adopts to the fragmented healthcare system and to the inadequacies of pharmaceutical market in times of economic crisis. A survey was carried out in using a postal questionnaire administered to a stratified sample of 320 physicians. The questionnaire used was the same with the one used in 2007 survey carried out in Greece and Cyprus, along with complementary questions for prescribing within economic crisis. The comparative analysis and assessment of the findings from the two surveys revealed that the current system and the inadequacies of pharmaceutical market in Cyprus expose physicians to a contrasting environment of public and private sector in terms of incentives, governance principles, financing and market structure. In contrast to public sector prescribers who have behaved in accordance with the governance principles, there is a strong motivation for private sector physicians to favour new branded products, and generally rejecting any ideas that could limit their clinical autonomy. Economic crisis seems to be unilaterally influential, as public sector physicians became more cost conscious while private sector prescribing is still resisting due to strong financial incentives.

Prescribing behaviour of physicians in Cyprus amid economic crises.

Pressures by patients, policy makers and pharma companies shape prescribing behaviour.

Disentangling prescribing behaviour could lead to the revelation of opportunities for improvements.

Differential prescribing could justify that decision‐making might be compromised for economic reasons.

Strategies of stratification: Regulating market access in the era of personalized medicine

Personalized medicine raises the stakes of pharmaceutical market regulation. Drawing on pragmatist valuation studies and science and technology studies literature on personalized medicine and pharmaceutical markets, this article demonstrates how complex negotiations about the value of a pharmaceutical can constitute a market in various ways, while also shaping the concerned patient populations. Tracing the path of a pharmacogenetic treatment, Spinraza, from its approval by the European Medicines Agency to its adoption in the publicly funded Danish healthcare system, we show how the market was formatted through particular stratifications of the patient population. We conceptualize these seemingly technical moves as strategies of stratification, that is, the application of techniques to assemble and divide data - and what data are meant to represent - into groups delineated by certain characteristics. We argue that stakeholders' use of strategies of stratification has important implications not only for market access, but also for the delineation of diseases and patient populations. Hence, it is crucial to make intelligible the mutual constitution of pharmaceutical markets and patient populations and the political efforts of delineating and connecting the two.

Why do general practitioners disregard direct to healthcare professional communication? A user-oriented evaluation to improve drug safety communication

Post-approval drug risks are a significant public health problem. A central instrument to mitigate them in the European Union is direct to healthcare professional communications (DHPC), typically a letter sent from the manufacturer to prescribers. However, evaluations show that DHPCs have limited impact on prescribing behavior. Which factors influence prescribers' lack of adoption of DHPCs remains unknown. This article presents a think-aloud reading study of 17 Danish general practitioners' reading aloud a 2013 DHPC about new oral anticoagulants, interjecting their immediate reactions and associations to daily clinical routines concurrently. We found that interviewees inferred more from the DHPC than risk information. It was perceived to be commercially biased, which generally discouraged reading despite learning new safety information. DHPCs were also disregarded because they are isolated from routinely used clinical information sources. Furthermore, DHPCs were perceived as pre-emptive acts of legal defence aiming to relocate responsibility from the manufacturer onto prescribers. In conclusion, the study indicates that certain DHPCs may be disregarded because of the perceived motivations that prescribers attribute to the DHPC senders. While the specific letter itself was deemed unsatisfactory, its legitimacy among prescribers remains the central challenge. Further integration with trusted and established information structures is also needed.

Multiple constraints compromise decision-making about implantable medical devices for individual patients: qualitative interviews with physicians

Background

Little research has examined how physicians choose medical devices for treating individual patients to reveal if interventions are needed to support decision-making and reduce device-associated morbidity and mortality. This study explored factors that influence choice of implantable device from among available options.

Methods

A descriptive qualitative approach was used. Physicians who implant orthopedic and cardiovascular devices were identified in publicly available directories and web sites. They were asked how they decided what device to use in a given patient, sources of information they consulted, and how patients were engaged in decision-making. Sampling was concurrent with data collection and analysis to achieve thematic saturation. Data were analyzed using constant comparative technique by all members of the research team.

Results

Twenty-two physicians from five Canadian provinces (10 cardiovascular, 12 orthopedic; 8, 10 and 4 early, mid and late career, respectively) were interviewed. Responses did not differ by specialty, geographic region or career stage. Five major categories of themes emerged that all influence decision-making about a range of devices, and often compromise choice of the most suitable device for a given patient, potentially leading to sub-optimal clinical outcomes: lack of evidence on device performance, patient factors, physician factors, organizational and health system factors, and device and device market factors. In the absence of evidence from research or device registries, tacit knowledge from trusted colleagues and less-trusted industry representatives informed device choice. Patients were rarely engaged in decision-making. Physician preference for particular devices was a barrier to acquiring competency in devices potentially more suitable for patients. Access to suitable devices was further limited to the number of comparable devices on the market, local inventory and purchasing contract specifications.

Conclusions

This study revealed that decision-making about devices is complex, cognitively challenging and constrained by several factors limiting access to and use of devices that could optimize patient outcomes. Further research is needed to assess the impact of these constraints on clinical outcomes, and develop interventions that optimize decision-making about device choice for treating given patients.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12911-017-0577-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.