SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

[Clinical Protocol of the Brazilian Ministry of Health on Parkinson's Disease: adherence and perception of the prescribing physician].

Cien Saude Colet · 2019-04-17

DOI: 10.1590/1413-81232020261.36432018PMID: 33533841

Check source for accessJournal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

This study evaluated the adherence of physicians to the Clinical Protocol and Therapeutic Guidelines on Parkinson's Disease (CPTG-PD) within the scope of the Unified Health System (SUS). A descriptive analysis of 375 drug application documents sent to the Pharmaceutical Services of the Rio Grande do Sul State Public Health Department (AF/SES/RS) between March and September 2016, and a structured survey to evaluate the physician's perception about the protocol and barriers to its use was conducted. Only 5.33% of the requests analyzed presented all the necessary data, considering the criteria of the protocol. The requests from specialists had a higher percentage of adherence to the diagnostic and dose criteria (p<0.05). The main barriers to protocol use were the lack of awareness or familiarity with the protocol (48%) and the lack of time to complete the mandatory documents (52%). More recently qualified physicians tended to perceive fewer barriers to protocol use (p<0.05). The results indicate that actions are still necessary to implement the PCDT-DP in medical practice, focusing on care and management teams. Greater integration between pharmaceutical assistance and the healthcare network is needed.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.