Percepción de los médicos de atención primaria sobre la receta electrónica en el Servicio Madrileño de Salud / Perceptions on electronic prescribing by primary care physicians in madrid healthcare service

Objetivo. Conocer la opinión de los médicos de atención primaria sobre la receta electrónica. Material y métodos. Estudio descriptivo mediante encuesta enviada a 527 médicos de atención primaria. Periodo: junio de 2014. El cuestionario incluía preguntas cerradas sobre el interés despertado, la satisfacción, las ventajas, las debilidades y las barreras y una pregunta abierta sobre las dificultades, todas ellas referidas a la receta electrónica. La satisfacción se midió en una escala de 1-10 y las ventajas, las debilidades y las barreras se valoraron mediante una escala tipo Likert de 5 ítems. El interés se midió mediante los dos métodos. El cuestionario se envió por correo electrónico para su cumplimentación online a través de la herramienta Google Drive®. Se realizó un análisis estadístico descriptivo. Resultados. Se obtuvo una tasa de respuesta del 47% (248/527). El interés manifestado fue de 8,7 (IC95%; 8,5-8,9) y la satisfacción de 7,9 (IC95%; 7,7-8). El 87,9% (IC95%; 83,8-92) utilizaban receta electrónica siempre que podían. Las ventajas mejor valoradas fueron: un 73,4% (IC95%; 67,8-78,9%) opinaron que facilitaba la revisión del tratamiento y un 59,3% (IC95%; 53,1-65,4%) que disminuía la carga burocrática. Entre las debilidades observadas destacaron las siguientes: el 87,9% (IC95%; 83,8-92%) creía que los médicos de atención especializada también deberían poder utilizar la receta electrónica. En relación con las barreras, el 30,2% (IC 95%; 24,5-36%) manifestaron que incorporar a un paciente al sistema de receta electrónica llevaba demasiado tiempo y el 4% (IC 95%; 1,6-6,5%) opinaba que la herramienta informática era difícil de utilizar. Conclusiones. Los médicos muestran un interés notable en utilizar receta electrónica y una alta satisfacción con el funcionamiento de la herramienta (AU)

Objective. To investigate the opinion of Primary Care physicians regarding electronic prescribing. Methods. Descriptive study by means of a questionnaire sent to 527 primary care physicians. Period: June 2014. The questionnaire included closed questions about interest shown, satisfaction, benefits, weaknesses, and barriers, and one open question about difficulties, all of them referred to electronic prescribing. Satisfaction was measured using 1-10 scale, and benefits, weaknesses, and barriers were evaluated by a 5-ítems Likert scale. Interest was measured using both methods. The questionnaire was sent by e-mail for on line response through Google Drive® tool. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed. Results. The response rate was 47% (248/527). Interest shown was 8.7 (95% CI; 8.5-8.9) and satisfaction was 7.9 (95% CI; 7.8-8). The great majority 87.9% (95% CI; 83.8-92%) of respondents used electronic prescribing where possible. Most reported benefits were: 73.4% (95% CI; 67.8-78.9%) of respondents considered that electronic prescribing facilitated medication review, and 59.3% (95% CI; 53.1-65.4) of them felt that it reduced bureaucratic burden. Among the observed weaknesses, they highlighted the following: 87.9% (95% CI; 83.8-92%) of respondents believed specialist care physicians should also be able to use electronic prescribing. Concerning to barriers: 30.2% (95% CI; 24.5-36%) of respondents think that entering a patient into the electronic prescribing system takes too much time, and 4% (95% CI; 1.6-6.5%) of them perceived the application as difficult to use. Conclusions. Physicians showed a notable interest in using electronic prescribing and high satisfaction with the application performance (AU)

[Perceptions on electronic prescribing by primary care physicians in madrid healthcare service]. / Percepción de los médicos de atención primaria sobre la receta electrónica en el Servicio Madrileño de Salud.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the opinion of Primary Care physicians regarding electronic prescribing. METHODS: Descriptive study by means of a questionnaire sent to 527 primary care physicians. PERIOD: June 2014. The questionnaire included closed questions about interest shown, satisfaction, benefits, weaknesses, and barriers, and one open question about difficulties, all of them referred to electronic prescribing. Satisfaction was measured using 1-10 scale, and benefits, weaknesses, and barriers were evaluated by a 5-ítems Likert scale. Interest was measured using both methods. The questionnaire was sent by e-mail for on line response through Google Drive® tool. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS: The response rate was 47% (248/527). Interest shown was 8.7 (95% CI; 8.5-8.9) and satisfaction was 7.9 (95% CI; 7.8-8). The great majority 87.9% (95% CI; 83.8-92%) of respondents used electronic prescribing where possible. Most reported benefits were: 73.4% (95% CI; 67.8-78.9%) of respondents considered that electronic prescribing facilitated medication review, and 59.3% (95% CI; 53.1-65.4) of them felt that it reduced bureaucratic burden. Among the observed weaknesses, they highlighted the following: 87.9% (95% CI; 83.8-92%) of respondents believed specialist care physicians should also be able to use electronic prescribing. Concerning to barriers: 30.2% (95% CI; 24.5-36%) of respondents think that entering a patient into the electronic prescribing system takes too much time, and 4% (95% CI; 1.6-6.5%) of them perceived the application as difficult to use. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians showed a notable interest in using electronic prescribing and high satisfaction with the application performance.

Desarrollo de un buscador de información farmacoterapéutica no publicada en revistas biomédicas / Developing a Search Engine for Pharmacotherapeutic Information that is Not Published in Biomedical Journals

Objetivo Identificar productores de información farmacoterapéutica no publicada en revistas biomédicas orientada a la evaluación y posicionamiento terapéutico de los medicamentos y desarrollar un buscador para el acceso a dicha información. Métodos Recopilación de sitios web productores de información sobre uso racional de los medicamentos e independientes de los intereses promocionales. Páginas web de acceso libre, y en castellano, gallego, catalán o inglés. Diseño de un buscador mediante aplicación «búsqueda personalizada» de Google. Resultados Se han recopilado 159 direcciones de Internet y se han clasificado en 9 etiquetas. El buscador, denominado AlquimiA y accesible desde http://www.elcomprimido.com/FARHSD/AlquimiA.htm, permite recuperar información de las fuentes seleccionadas. Conclusiones Se han identificado las principales fuentes de información farmacoterapéutica no publicada en revistas biomédicas. El buscador constituye una herramienta útil para la búsqueda y acceso a las publicaciones de «evidencia gris» en Internet (AU)

Objective To identify publishers of pharmacotherapeutic information not found in biomedical journals that focuses on evaluating and providing advice on medicines and to develop a search engine to access this information. Methods Compiling web sites that publish information on the rational use of medicines and have no commercial interests. Free-access web sites in Spanish, Galician, Catalan or English. Designing a search engine using the Google “custom search” application. Results Overall 159 Internet addresses were compiled and were classified into 9 labels. We were able to recover the information from the selected sources using a search engine, which is called “AlquimiA” and available from http://www.elcomprimido.com/FARHSD/AlquimiA.htmConclusionsThe main sources of pharmacotherapeutic information not published in biomedical journals were identified. The search engine is a useful tool for searching and accessing “grey literature” on the Internet (AU)

Developing a search engine for pharmacotherapeutic information that is not published in biomedical journals.

OBJECTIVE: To identify publishers of pharmacotherapeutic information not found in biomedical journals that focuses on evaluating and providing advice on medicines and to develop a search engine to access this information. METHODS: Compiling web sites that publish information on the rational use of medicines and have no commercial interests. Free-access web sites in Spanish, Galician, Catalan or English. Designing a search engine using the Google "custom search" application. RESULTS: Overall 159 internet addresses were compiled and were classified into 9 labels. We were able to recover the information from the selected sources using a search engine, which is called "AlquimiA" and available from http://www.elcomprimido.com/FARHSD/AlquimiA.htm. CONCLUSIONS: The main sources of pharmacotherapeutic information not published in biomedical journals were identified. The search engine is a useful tool for searching and accessing "grey literature" on the internet.