You are currently visiting the test version of the radboud Dspace repository. To access the production instance, you can navigate to: https://repository.ubn.ru.nl
A systematic literature review: prescribing indicators related to type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular risk management.

Fulltext:
87291.pdf
Embargo:
until further notice
Size:
144.1Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Publisher’s version
Publication year
2010Source
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, 19, 4, (2010), pp. 319-34ISSN
Annotation
01 april 2010
Publication type
Article / Letter to editor

Display more detailsDisplay less details
Organization
IQ Healthcare
Journal title
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety
Volume
vol. 19
Issue
iss. 4
Page start
p. 319
Page end
p. 34
Subject
NCEBP 3: Implementation ScienceAbstract
PURPOSE: Valid prescribing indicators (PI) are needed for reliable assessment of prescribing quality. The purpose of this study is to describe the validity of existing PI for type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular risk management. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search for studies describing the development and assessment of relevant PIs between January 1990 and January 2009. We grouped identified PI as drug- or disease-oriented, and according to the aspects of prescribing addressed and the additional clinical information included. We reviewed the clinimetric characteristics of the different types of PI. RESULTS: We identified 59 documents describing the clinimetrics of 16 types of PI covering relevant prescribing aspects, including first-choice treatment, safety issues, dosing, costs, sufficient and timely treatment. We identified three types of drug-oriented, and five types of disease-oriented PI with proven face and content validity as well as operational feasibility in different settings. PI focusing on treatment modifications were the only indicators that showed concurrent validity. Several solutions were proposed for dealing with case-mix and sample size problems, but their actual effect on PI scores was insufficiently assessed. Predictive validity of individual PI is not yet known. CONCLUSION: We identified a range of existing PI that are valid for internal quality assessment as they are evidence-based, accepted by professionals, and reliable. For external use, problems of patient case-mix and sample size per PI should be better addressed. Further research is needed for selecting indicators that predict clinical outcomes.
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
- Academic publications [244578]
- Electronic publications [132441]
- Faculty of Medical Sciences [92890]
Upload full text
Use your RU or RadboudUMC credentials to log in with SURFconext to upload a file for processing by the repository team.