Jeffrey P Ebert, E Madeline Grenader, Rachel E Gonzales, Evan A Spencer, Devon M Schroeder, Lauren Southwick, Frances S Shofer, M Kit Delgado, Anish K Agarwal
{"title":"临床医生对阿片类药物处方报告的看法与同行比较和患者报告的结果。","authors":"Jeffrey P Ebert, E Madeline Grenader, Rachel E Gonzales, Evan A Spencer, Devon M Schroeder, Lauren Southwick, Frances S Shofer, M Kit Delgado, Anish K Agarwal","doi":"10.1097/JMQ.0000000000000228","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Providing feedback to clinicians on their prescribing is a promising approach to right-sizing opioid prescriptions. The present research investigated the perceived acceptability, appropriateness, helpfulness, and areas for improvement of a monthly report providing surgical clinicians feedback on their postoperative opioid prescribing relative to guidelines, peer prescribing, and patient-reported pills taken, as well as on patient-reported ability to manage pain. Between January and May 2023, surgeons, advanced practice providers, and residents who recently received these reports as part of a health system quality improvement intervention completed a survey (n = 38) or interview (n = 8). Mean (SD) acceptability of the prescribing report was 4.2 (0.8), and appropriateness was 4.2 (0.8); appropriateness varied by clinical role. All features of the report were rated as \"very\" or \"extremely\" helpful by a majority of respondents. Interviewees wished for fuller explanations, real-time updates, and improved accuracy. These findings can inform the design of clinician feedback in learning health systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":101338,"journal":{"name":"American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinician Views of an Opioid Prescribing Report with Peer Comparisons and Patient-Reported Outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Jeffrey P Ebert, E Madeline Grenader, Rachel E Gonzales, Evan A Spencer, Devon M Schroeder, Lauren Southwick, Frances S Shofer, M Kit Delgado, Anish K Agarwal\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/JMQ.0000000000000228\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Providing feedback to clinicians on their prescribing is a promising approach to right-sizing opioid prescriptions. The present research investigated the perceived acceptability, appropriateness, helpfulness, and areas for improvement of a monthly report providing surgical clinicians feedback on their postoperative opioid prescribing relative to guidelines, peer prescribing, and patient-reported pills taken, as well as on patient-reported ability to manage pain. Between January and May 2023, surgeons, advanced practice providers, and residents who recently received these reports as part of a health system quality improvement intervention completed a survey (n = 38) or interview (n = 8). Mean (SD) acceptability of the prescribing report was 4.2 (0.8), and appropriateness was 4.2 (0.8); appropriateness varied by clinical role. All features of the report were rated as \\\"very\\\" or \\\"extremely\\\" helpful by a majority of respondents. Interviewees wished for fuller explanations, real-time updates, and improved accuracy. These findings can inform the design of clinician feedback in learning health systems.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101338,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/JMQ.0000000000000228\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JMQ.0000000000000228","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Clinician Views of an Opioid Prescribing Report with Peer Comparisons and Patient-Reported Outcomes.
Providing feedback to clinicians on their prescribing is a promising approach to right-sizing opioid prescriptions. The present research investigated the perceived acceptability, appropriateness, helpfulness, and areas for improvement of a monthly report providing surgical clinicians feedback on their postoperative opioid prescribing relative to guidelines, peer prescribing, and patient-reported pills taken, as well as on patient-reported ability to manage pain. Between January and May 2023, surgeons, advanced practice providers, and residents who recently received these reports as part of a health system quality improvement intervention completed a survey (n = 38) or interview (n = 8). Mean (SD) acceptability of the prescribing report was 4.2 (0.8), and appropriateness was 4.2 (0.8); appropriateness varied by clinical role. All features of the report were rated as "very" or "extremely" helpful by a majority of respondents. Interviewees wished for fuller explanations, real-time updates, and improved accuracy. These findings can inform the design of clinician feedback in learning health systems.