Effects of two educational programmes aimed at improving the utilization of non-opioid analgesics in family medicine clinics in Mexico

• Published in: Journal of evaluation in clinical practice 2010-08, Vol.16 (4), p.716-723
• Main Authors: Doubova, Svetlana Vladislavovna, Mino-León, Dolores, Reyes-Morales, Hortensia, Flores-Hernandez, Sergio, Torres-Arreola, Laura del Pilar, Pérez-Cuevas, Ricardo
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Ambulatory Care Facilities; ambulatory patients; Analgesics - therapeutic use; educational programmes; family doctors; Female; Humans; Male; Mexico; Middle Aged; non-opioid analgesics; Patient Education as Topic; Physicians, Family - education; Program Evaluation
• ISSN: 1356-1294; 1365-2753
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2009.01181.x

Objectives  To develop and test two educational programmes (interactive and passive) aimed at improving family doctors' (FD) prescribing practices and patient's knowledge and use of non‐opioid analgesics (NOA). Methods  The educational programmes were conducted in two family medicine clinics by using a three‐stage approach: baseline evaluation, design, and implementation of educational activities, and post‐programme evaluation. An interactive educational programme (IEP) was compared with a passive educational programme (PEP); both were participated by FDs and patients. The IEP for FDs comprised of workshops, discussion groups, in‐service training and guidelines, while for patients the IEP consisted of an interactive session with a video, leaflets and a discussion. The PEP consisted in delivering the guidelines to the FDs and the leaflets to patients. The effect of the programmes on the FDs was measured through the appropriateness of prescriptions and analysed using the differences‐in‐differences estimator (D‐in‐D), and on patients through changes in self‐medication and in their knowledge about the proper use and adverse events by analysing the inter‐ and intra‐group differences before and after the programmes. Results  The IEP obtained better results to improve appropriate FDs prescription of NOA than PEP (D‐in‐D = 15%). Regarding the patients, the PEP group reached higher reduction of self‐medication than the IEP group (13.4% vs. 9.1%); the knowledge of proper NOA use increased by 8.5% in both groups, whereas knowledge of NOA‐related adverse events was better in the IEP (39.6%) than in the PEP group (9.2%). Conclusions  The IEP was better to improve the doctors' abilities to prescribe NOAs, and both programmes improved patients' knowledge.