Monia Donati, Valentina Giunchi, Giulia Grillini, Marco Domenicali, Maria Lia Lunardelli, Veronica Pasini, Susy Milandri, Monica Mussoni, Fabio Pieraccini, Elisa Sangiorgi, Emanuel Raschi, Valentina Colonnello, Carlotta Lunghi, Elisabetta Poluzzi
{"title":"医疗保健专业人员对支持适当处方的工具的态度、障碍和促进因素:一项横断面研究。","authors":"Monia Donati, Valentina Giunchi, Giulia Grillini, Marco Domenicali, Maria Lia Lunardelli, Veronica Pasini, Susy Milandri, Monica Mussoni, Fabio Pieraccini, Elisa Sangiorgi, Emanuel Raschi, Valentina Colonnello, Carlotta Lunghi, Elisabetta Poluzzi","doi":"10.1007/s00228-025-03852-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Potentially inappropriate prescriptions are associated with an increased risk of drug-drug interactions, adverse events, and unfavorable clinical outcomes, especially in older adults. Although different tools to improve appropriate prescribing have been developed to support healthcare professionals, their application and the barriers to their use remain insufficiently explored. This study aimed to assess Italian healthcare professionals' knowledge of these tools and identify obstacles to their adoption.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study used a purposefully designed questionnaire to assess knowledge, adoption, and barriers related to appropriateness tools. The tools included were identified through a literature review and subsequently refined via expert consensus. Open-ended responses were analyzed using a conventional content analysis approach, and the analyses focused on differences across professional groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey collected 657 responses from pharmacists (35%), nurses (26%), general practitioners (22%), geriatricians/internists (9%), and other physicians (8%). The Beers and STOPP/START criteria were used by 38% and 34% of participants, respectively, with geriatricians and other physicians being the primary users. Additionally, 34% of participants reported using specific software integrated into their institutional computer systems. Among 294 respondents identifying barriers to appropriate prescribing, the most common were lack of time (14%), lack of knowledge (10%), and accessibility/costs of digital tools (8%). Key facilitators included specific training (38%), integrated software/apps (29%), and more time with patients (11%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The adoption of tools supporting appropriate prescribing remains limited among healthcare professionals in Italy, with significant differences among professionals. Policymakers and healthcare institutions should focus on education, interprofessional collaboration, and user-friendly digital solutions to improve prescribing process and patient safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":11857,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":"1155-1165"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12279595/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Attitudes, barriers, and facilitators toward tools supporting appropriate prescribing among healthcare professionals: a cross-sectional study.\",\"authors\":\"Monia Donati, Valentina Giunchi, Giulia Grillini, Marco Domenicali, Maria Lia Lunardelli, Veronica Pasini, Susy Milandri, Monica Mussoni, Fabio Pieraccini, Elisa Sangiorgi, Emanuel Raschi, Valentina Colonnello, Carlotta Lunghi, Elisabetta Poluzzi\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00228-025-03852-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Potentially inappropriate prescriptions are associated with an increased risk of drug-drug interactions, adverse events, and unfavorable clinical outcomes, especially in older adults. Although different tools to improve appropriate prescribing have been developed to support healthcare professionals, their application and the barriers to their use remain insufficiently explored. This study aimed to assess Italian healthcare professionals' knowledge of these tools and identify obstacles to their adoption.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study used a purposefully designed questionnaire to assess knowledge, adoption, and barriers related to appropriateness tools. The tools included were identified through a literature review and subsequently refined via expert consensus. Open-ended responses were analyzed using a conventional content analysis approach, and the analyses focused on differences across professional groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey collected 657 responses from pharmacists (35%), nurses (26%), general practitioners (22%), geriatricians/internists (9%), and other physicians (8%). The Beers and STOPP/START criteria were used by 38% and 34% of participants, respectively, with geriatricians and other physicians being the primary users. Additionally, 34% of participants reported using specific software integrated into their institutional computer systems. Among 294 respondents identifying barriers to appropriate prescribing, the most common were lack of time (14%), lack of knowledge (10%), and accessibility/costs of digital tools (8%). Key facilitators included specific training (38%), integrated software/apps (29%), and more time with patients (11%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The adoption of tools supporting appropriate prescribing remains limited among healthcare professionals in Italy, with significant differences among professionals. Policymakers and healthcare institutions should focus on education, interprofessional collaboration, and user-friendly digital solutions to improve prescribing process and patient safety.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11857,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1155-1165\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12279595/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-025-03852-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-025-03852-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Attitudes, barriers, and facilitators toward tools supporting appropriate prescribing among healthcare professionals: a cross-sectional study.
Purpose: Potentially inappropriate prescriptions are associated with an increased risk of drug-drug interactions, adverse events, and unfavorable clinical outcomes, especially in older adults. Although different tools to improve appropriate prescribing have been developed to support healthcare professionals, their application and the barriers to their use remain insufficiently explored. This study aimed to assess Italian healthcare professionals' knowledge of these tools and identify obstacles to their adoption.
Methods: The study used a purposefully designed questionnaire to assess knowledge, adoption, and barriers related to appropriateness tools. The tools included were identified through a literature review and subsequently refined via expert consensus. Open-ended responses were analyzed using a conventional content analysis approach, and the analyses focused on differences across professional groups.
Results: The survey collected 657 responses from pharmacists (35%), nurses (26%), general practitioners (22%), geriatricians/internists (9%), and other physicians (8%). The Beers and STOPP/START criteria were used by 38% and 34% of participants, respectively, with geriatricians and other physicians being the primary users. Additionally, 34% of participants reported using specific software integrated into their institutional computer systems. Among 294 respondents identifying barriers to appropriate prescribing, the most common were lack of time (14%), lack of knowledge (10%), and accessibility/costs of digital tools (8%). Key facilitators included specific training (38%), integrated software/apps (29%), and more time with patients (11%).
Conclusions: The adoption of tools supporting appropriate prescribing remains limited among healthcare professionals in Italy, with significant differences among professionals. Policymakers and healthcare institutions should focus on education, interprofessional collaboration, and user-friendly digital solutions to improve prescribing process and patient safety.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology publishes original papers on all aspects of clinical pharmacology and drug therapy in humans. Manuscripts are welcomed on the following topics: therapeutic trials, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, pharmacogenetics, drug metabolism, adverse drug reactions, drug interactions, all aspects of drug development, development relating to teaching in clinical pharmacology, pharmacoepidemiology, and matters relating to the rational prescribing and safe use of drugs. Methodological contributions relevant to these topics are also welcomed.
Data from animal experiments are accepted only in the context of original data in man reported in the same paper. EJCP will only consider manuscripts describing the frequency of allelic variants in different populations if this information is linked to functional data or new interesting variants. Highly relevant differences in frequency with a major impact in drug therapy for the respective population may be submitted as a letter to the editor.
Straightforward phase I pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic studies as parts of new drug development will only be considered for publication if the paper involves
-a compound that is interesting and new in some basic or fundamental way, or
-methods that are original in some basic sense, or
-a highly unexpected outcome, or
-conclusions that are scientifically novel in some basic or fundamental sense.