PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 7719188

What constitutes good prescribing?

N Barber
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Drugs are the mainstay of medical treatment, yet there are few reports on what constitutes "good prescribing." What is more the existing guidance tends to imply that right answers exist, rather than recognising the complex trade offs that have to be made between conflicting aims. This paper proposes four aims that a prescriber should try to achieve, both on first prescribing a drug and on subsequently monitoring it. They are: to maximise effectiveness, minimise risks, minimise costs, and respect the patient's choices. This model of good prescribing brings together the traditional balancing of risks and benefits with the need to reduce costs and the right of the patient to make choices in treatment. The four aims are shown as a diagram plotting their commonest conflicts, which may be used as an aid to discussion and decision making.

Explore related subjects

Choice BehaviorDrug CostsDrug PrescriptionsDrug TherapyHumansPatient SatisfactionPhysician-Patient RelationsQuality of Health CareState MedicineUnited KingdomJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

N Barber. 1995-04-08. What constitutes good prescribing?. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.310.6984.923

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

A compensation election for binary social choice.

We report experimental results examining the properties of a bidding mechanism, the "Compensation Election," which is designed to implement a simple binary choice between two options. We may think of the group decision problem as a choice between a new rule and the status quo. The rule and the status quo are each common outcomes that apply across all individuals, but the value or cost that they induce on each individual differs according to each individual's circumstances: some gain, some lose, and others are unaffected by a change to the new from the old. Rather than casting votes, each subject submits a bid reflecting his willingness to pay to induce the group to select one option and the amount he wishes to be paid if the alternative option is selected. The Compensation Election chooses the option that receives the highest sum of bids. We find that, although the Compensation Election allows subjects to strategically bid above their value (or even for the option they do not prefer), such behavior is not the norm. We also find that subjects' bids more truthfully reveal their values when there are more bidders in the election.

Choice Behavior↗
PubMed2007

The effects of expanding patient choice of provider on waiting times: evidence from a policy experiment.

Long waiting times for inpatient treatment in the UK National Health Service have been a source of popular and political concern, and therefore a target for policy initiatives. In the London Patient Choice Project, patients at risk of breaching inpatient waiting time targets were offered the choice of an alternative hospital with a guaranteed shorter wait. This paper develops a simple theoretical model of the effect of greater patient choice on waiting times. It then uses a difference in difference econometric methodology to estimate the impact of the London choice project on ophthalmology waiting times. In line with the model predictions, the project led to shorter average waiting times in the London region and a convergence in waiting times amongst London hospitals.

Choice Behavior↗