Analysis of the Cochrane Review: Non-medical Prescribing versus Medical Prescribing for Acute and Chronic Disease Management in Primary and Secondary Care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;11:CD011227.

Authors

  • Gonçalo Silva Duarte Laboratório de Farmacologia Clínica e Terapêutica. Faculdade de Medicina. Universidade de Lisboa. Lisboa. Portugal. Clinical Pharmacology Unit. Instituto de Medicina Molecular. Lisboa. Portugal. Centro de Estudos de Medicina Baseada na Evidência. Faculdade de Medicina. Universidade de Lisboa. Lisboa. Portugal.
  • Ricardo Martins Delgado Centro de Estudos de Medicina Baseada na Evidência. Faculdade de Medicina. Universidade de Lisboa. Lisboa. Portugal.
  • João Costa Laboratório de Farmacologia Clínica e Terapêutica. Faculdade de Medicina. Universidade de Lisboa. Lisboa. Portugal. Clinical Pharmacology Unit. Instituto de Medicina Molecular. Lisboa. Portugal. Centro de Estudos de Medicina Baseada na Evidência. Faculdade de Medicina. Universidade de Lisboa. Lisboa. Portugal.
  • António Vaz-Carneiro Centro de Estudos de Medicina Baseada na Evidência. Faculdade de Medicina. Universidade de Lisboa. Lisboa. Portugal. Centro Colaborador Português da Rede Cochrane Iberoamericana. Lisboa. Portugal.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20344/amp.8652

Keywords:

Acute Disease/therapy, Chronic Disease/therapy, Drug Prescriptions, Systematic Review

Abstract

In countries with diverse socioeconomic levels, in order to address the health care demands, the consideration of a wide array of strategies is needed; among these, non-medical prescription can be included. The objective of this revision was to ascertain whether non-medical prescription results in comparable clinical and patient-related outcomes to medical prescription. This systematic review was conducted in compliance with the standard Cochrane methodology. Clinical outcomes were compared between prescription carried out by non-medical health professionals and doctors, provided that the non-medical health professional prescribed with a high degree of autonomy, both in hospital and community practice, in countries with low, medium and high socioeconomic level. The review included 46 clinical trials, with different designs, with 37 337 participants overall. Most studies were based on the management of chronic disease in higher income countries, where the evidence supports comparable outcomes for the markers of disease relative to high blood pressure (moderate-certainty of evidence), diabetes control (high-certainty of evidence); high cholesterol (moderatecertainty
of evidence), among others. Prescription by pharmacists and nurses with different levels of undergraduate, specific and postgraduate education could provide comparable outcomes to medical prescription, specifically with regards to adherence to therapy, adverse events, overall satisfaction, quality of life, and resource utilisation (hospitalisations, visits to the emergency department, and consultations). Non-medical prescribers frequently had medical support available to facilitate a collaborative practice. With appropriate training and support, non-medical prescription by nurses and pharmacists can be as effective as when carried out by doctors.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Published

2017-01-31

How to Cite

1.
Duarte GS, Delgado RM, Costa J, Vaz-Carneiro A. Analysis of the Cochrane Review: Non-medical Prescribing versus Medical Prescribing for Acute and Chronic Disease Management in Primary and Secondary Care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;11:CD011227. Acta Med Port [Internet]. 2017 Jan. 31 [cited 2024 Mar. 28];30(1):7-11. Available from: https://actamedicaportuguesa.com/revista/index.php/amp/article/view/8652

Issue

Section

Cochrane Corner