The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
| Title |
Determinants of medical prescriptions for COPD care: an analysis of the EPOCONSUL clinical audit
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/copd.s160842 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jose Luis Lopez-Campos, Bernardino Alcázar Navarrete, Joan B Soriano, Juan J Soler-Cataluña, José Miguel Rodríguez González-Moro, Manuel E Fuentes Ferrer, Myriam Calle Rubio |
| Abstract |
Current COPD management recommendations indicate that pharmacological treatment can be stepped up or down, but there are no recommendations on how to make this adjustment. We aimed to describe pharmacological prescriptions during a routine clinical visit for COPD and study the determinants of changing therapy. EPOCONSUL is a Spanish nationwide observational cross-sectional clinical audit with prospective case recruitment including 4,508 COPD patients from outpatient respiratory clinics for a period of 12 months (May 2014-May 2015). Prescription patterns were examined in 4,448 cases and changes analyzed in stepwise backward, binomial, multivariate, logistic regression models. Patterns of prescription of inhaled therapy groups were no treatment prescribed, 124 (2.8%) cases; one or two long-acting bronchodilators (LABDs) alone, 1,502 (34.6%) cases; LABD with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), 389 (8.6%) cases; and triple therapy cases, 2,428 (53.9%) cases. Incorrect prescriptions of inhaled therapies were observed in 261 (5.9%) cases. After the clinical visit was audited, 3,494 (77.5%) cases did not modify their therapeutic prescription, 307 (6.8%) cases had a step up, 238 (5.3%) cases had a change for a similar scheme, 182 (4.1%) cases had a step down, and 227 (5.1%) cases had other nonspecified change. Stepping-up strategies were associated with clinical presentation (chronic bronchitis, asthma-like symptoms, and exacerbations), a positive bronchodilator test, and specific inhaled medication groups. Stepping down was associated with lung function impairment, ICS containing regimens, and nonexacerbator phenotype. The EPOCONSUL study shows a comprehensive evaluation of pharmacological treatments in COPD care, highlighting strengths and weaknesses, to help us understand how physicians use available drugs. |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 16% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 14 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 16% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 14 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 July 2018.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#2,404
of 2,578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#299,743
of 341,606 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#67
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,578 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,606 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.