This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Dennis Ross-Degnan, ScD; Stephen B. Soumerai, ScD; Eric Fortess, ScD, MPH; Jerry H. Gurwitz, MD
Harvard Medical School Boston, Mass

JAMA. 1994;272(16):1252.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.

—Dr Spielberg suggests that the manufacturer's warning letter to physicians regarding the risk of zomepirac was worded ambiguously to soften its impact. He states that this was an important factor in the failure to affect prescribing habits.

We are not as sanguine, however, about the effectiveness of even more accurate and persuasive printed informational materials, used alone, in changing physician behavior. Data from four large and well-controlled trials strongly indicate that while mailed drug information may increase knowledge temporarily, it generally has little or no effect on prescribing behavior, unless it is supplemented by face-to-face communications, or heavy reporting of toxic effects by television, radio, and other media.¹

Dr Musa's letter implies that because the withdrawal of a new agent may lead to a return to the use of older, suboptimal therapies (that would have continued without introduction of the new drug), there is "no net effect." . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?