Off-label prescribing in pediatric outpatients.

OBJECTIVE: To study the characteristics of off-label prescribing and adverse drug reaction (ADR) occurrence in a sample of pediatric outpatients treated by general practitioners. METHODS: A survey on pediatric drug prescribing was implemented in 46 general practices in southwestern France. All consecutive patients aged 0 to 16 years were included. Patient characteristics, reasons for consultation, and drug prescribed (including indications) were collected. ADRs occurring ≤10 days after the date of consultation were recorded by the general practitioners (spontaneous notification). Off-label prescription was defined as prescribing outside the specifications of the Summary of Product Characteristics. RESULTS: Among the 2313 children seen between March 8, 2011 and July 31, 2011, 1960 were exposed to ≥1 prescribed drug. Mean age was 5.6 years, with a gender ratio of 1.1. Among children with prescriptions, 37.6% (n = 736) were exposed to ≥1 off-label prescription and 6.7% (n = 132) to ≥1 unlicensed drug. Off-label prescribing involved an unapproved indication in 56.4% of cases (n = 416), a lower dosage (26.5%, n = 195) or higher dosage (19.5%, n = 144) than specified, age not labeled (7.2%, n = 53), incorrect route of administration (3.5%, n = 26), and contraindication (0.3%, n = 2). A total of 23 ADRs were reported (1.5% of patients with off-label prescriptions). ADR occurrence was not significantly related to off-label drug prescribing. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the numerous initiatives implemented for promoting rational medicine use in children, the prevalence of off-label prescription in outpatient pediatric practice remains high.

Identifying competencies required for medication prescribing for general practice residents: a nominal group technique study.

BACKGROUND: Teaching of medication prescribing is a specific challenge in general practice curriculum. The aim of this study was to identify and rank the competencies required for prescribing medication for general practice residents in France. METHODS: Qualitative consensus study using the nominal group technique. We invited different stakeholders of the general practice curriculum and medication use in primary care to a series of meetings. The nominal group technique allowed for the quick development of a list of consensual and ranked answers to the following question: "At the end of their general practice curriculum, in terms of medication prescribing, what should residents be able to do?". RESULTS: Four meetings were held that involved a total of 31 participants, enabling the creation of a final list of 29 ranked items, grouped in 4 domains. The four domains identified were 'pharmacology', 'regulatory standards', 'therapeutics', and 'communication (both with patients and healthcare professionals)'. Overall, the five items the most highly valued across the four meetings were: 'write a legible and understandable prescription', 'identify specific populations', 'prescribe the doses and durations following the indication', 'explain a lack of medication prescription to the patient', 'decline inappropriate medication request'. The 'communication skills' domain was the domain with the highest number of items (10 items), and with the most highly-valued items. CONCLUSION: The study results suggest a need for developing general practice residents' communication skills regarding medication prescribing.

["Local" or "mobile" screening for diabetic retinopathy in general practice by non-mydriatic digital cameras? about the Diabetes Midi-Pyrénées network activity between 2005 and 2010]. / Dépistage "fixe" ou "itinérant" de la rétinopathie diabétique par rétinographe non mydriatique? A propos du bilan d'activité du réseau Diabète Midi-Pyrénées entre 2005 et 2010.

Fundus photographs using non-mydriatic digital cameras for diabetic retinopathy screening have been studied in France during the past 10 years. Nevertheless, the different screening modalities have not been compared. The main goal of this study was to compare patient recruitment with two different screening modalities, and secondarily to compare diagnostic effectiveness and cost. A retrospective study analyzed data from the Diabetes Midi Pyrenees Network in 2005 and between 2006 and 2010. In 2005, a vehicle with digital camera traveled through a rural department in order to screen diabetic patients whose last fundus examination was performed greater than 1 year previously. Between 2006 and 2010, general practitioners sent their diabetic patients whose last fundus examination was performed greater than 1 year previously to a "local" screening site. In the two cases, fundus photographs were made by trained operator at screening site and analyzed by an ophthalmologist. The "mobile" screening recruited 698 patients, and the "local" screening 345 patients. Patients recruited by "mobile" screening were older than those recruited by "local" screening. They were preferentially men and suffered from diabetes from far longer The diagnostic performance of "local" screening was 26.8%, and it was 28.6% for "mobile" screening (p = 0.47). The cost of screening was higher for "mobile" screening: 116 Euro against 61 Euro for "local" screening. "Mobile" screening could allow more patient recruitment than "local" screening when geographic and demographic constraints are more important.

[Family pharmacy: survey of a sample of patients in Midi-Pyrénées]. / La pharmacie familiale : enquête auprès d'un échantillon de patients en Midi-Pyrénées.

OBJECTIVE: Possession of drugs at home in the family pharmacy and self-medication are at risk. METHOD: Appraisal based upon an analysis of 247 questionnaires completed by patients and 116 questionnaires completed by general practitioners in the French department of Haute Garonne (Southwestern, France). RESULTS: Two hundred and forty-four patients were involved in the study. In 80% of cases, women were in charge of family pharmacy who was located in 66% of cases in a unsecurise room and could be reached by children in 17% of cases. Drugs most frequently found: antiseptics (97%), paracetamol (91%), anti-inflammatory drugs (68%), anti-diarrhea (60%). For the physicians 52 useable questionnaires, 80% of physician were confronted with one of three risks: self-medication, drug autolysis, poisoning in children. CONCLUSION: Women are the referent of the family pharmacy. The doctors seem best placed to a message of prevention through minimal advice.

[Self-medication in children by parents: a real risk? A cross-sectional descriptive study]. / Automédication des enfants par les parents: un vrai risque? Enquête descriptive transversale.

Self-medication is a common practice in France. What is parent's behaviour towards their children? Trying to draw an inventory of this practice, we carried out a survey of self-medication of children under 12 years of age by their parents. The main objective was to assess the frequency of self-medication and the secondary purposes were to describe habits, dangerous behaviours and common mistakes. The results speak for themselves: 96% of parents self-medicate their children, very early, between 6 and 24 months, mostly for mild pathologies; 39% believe they are taking a risk doing it; most frequently used medecines are paracetamol and ibubrofene; 55% of them make a mistake when self-medicating their children (21% combine two brands of paracetamol or two anti-inflammatories, 10% swap pipettes...). Mistakes revealed by this study could be the bases of an education program for parents displayed by GPs and health care workers.