Synergy between publication and promotion: comparing adoption of new evidence in Canada and the United States - 28/08/11
, Finlay A McAlister, MD, MSc a, Stephen B Soumerai, ScD bAbstract |
Purpose |
Few studies have examined the effect of new evidence from clinical trials on physician practice. We took advantage of differences in promotional activity in Canada and the United States for the Heart Outcomes Prevention and Evaluation (HOPE) study and the Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study (RALES) to determine if publication of new evidence changes practice, and the extent to which promotion influences adoption of new evidence.
Methods |
We used longitudinal dispensing data, collected from 1998 to 2001, to examine changes in prescribing patterns for ramipril and other angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors before and after the HOPE study. We also obtained estimates for promotional expenditures. We stratified analyses by country, to isolate the effect of promotion, and used interrupted time series methods to adjust for pre-existing prescribing trends. Similar analyses were conducted for spironolactone use before and after RALES.
Results |
Publication of the HOPE study results was associated with rapid increases in the use of ramipril. After adjusting for pre-existing prescribing trends, ramipril prescribing increased by 12% per month (P = 0.001) in Canada versus 5% per month (P = 0.001) in the United States after the study results were presented and published. One year later, ramipril accounted for 30% of the ACE inhibitor market in Canada versus 6% in the United States. The year before publication of these results, expenditures for detailing increased by 20% in Canada (to $18 per physician) but decreased by 7% in the United States (to $13 per physician); the year after publication, spending increased to $27 per physician in Canada versus $23 per physician in the United States. In the absence of promotional activity for RALES in either country, publication of results was associated with more modest but similar increases of 2% per month (P = 0.001) in spironolactone use in both countries.
Conclusion |
Publication of new evidence is associated with modest changes in practice. Promotional activity appears to increase the adoption of evidence. Rather than relying on the publication of articles and creation of guidelines, those wishing to accelerate the adoption of new evidence may need to undertake more active promotion.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Plan
 | Drs. Majumdar and McAlister are Population Health Investigators supported by the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research, and New Investigators supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr. Soumerai is an Investigator in the HMO Research Network Center for Education and Research in Therapeutics, supported by the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (grant U18H510391) and the Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Foundation. |
Vol 115 - N° 6
P. 467-472 - octobre 2003 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Early and late effects of low-dose aspirin on renal function in elderly patients
- Refael Segal, Emilia Lubart, Arthur Leibovitz, Matitiahu Berkovitch, Beni Habot, Michael Yaron, Dan Caspi
- Effects of early and late administration of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors on mortality after myocardial infarction
- Eric J Rodrigues, Mark J Eisenberg, Louise Pilote
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?