title: Health professionals: how do they assess new medicines?
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To identify the types of information used by health professionals when assessing a new medicine, and to discover whether measures of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness are understood and used.
  
  
  METHODS
  A cross-sectional survey of 56 health professionals was undertaken in a tertiary hospital in New Zealand. Respondents were consultants, registrars, house-surgeons, pharmacists, and specialist nurses
  
  
  METHODS
  Health professionals' opinions on clinical and cost information required for assessing a new medicine; their ability to calculate measures of risk; and their ability to define clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and types of economic analysis.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Thirty-four percent of respondents considered journals and research to be the most accurate sources of information when assessing a new medicine. Efficacy, safety, contraindications and side-effects were the most important information sought. In total, 93% gave an acceptable definition of clinical effectiveness, and 38% of cost-effectiveness. The majority of each profession (except specialist nurses) could calculate relative risk reduction (RRR) and absolute risk reduction (ARR) but fewer could calculate numbers needed to treat (NNT). Eighty-four percent of respondents felt that cost affected their assessment of a new medicine. Less than a quarter of respondents could define each type of economic analysis. Consultants and pharmacists appeared to have the best knowledge of economic analysis.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Efficacy, safety, contraindications and side-effects were the most important information sought when assessing a new medicine. Health professionals' knowledge of clinical effectiveness was greater than their knowledge of cost-effectiveness. Consultants and pharmacists appeared to have the best knowledge of economic analysis.
authors.affiliation: Pharmacy, University of Otago, New Zealand. june.tordoff@stonebow.otago.ac.nz
authors.forename: Rebecca
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Cheng
authors.forename: Kirsty
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Cook
authors.forename: Sarah
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Dowman
authors.forename: Rebecca
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Lawn
authors.forename: Jemma
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Leary
authors.forename: Taryn
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Quinn
authors.forename: Kim
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Schroder
authors.forename: Nicola
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Smith
authors.forename: June
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Tordoff
mesh_terms: D000075202:Contraindications; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D003625:Data Collection; D004345:Drug Industry; D004358:Drug Therapy / Q000639:trends*; D064420:Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; D020407:Internet; D009520:New Zealand; D009726:Nurses; D010564:Personnel, Hospital; D004364:Pharmaceutical Preparations; D010595:Pharmacists; D010820:Physicians; D011643:Publishing; D012017:Referral and Consultation; D040242:Risk Reduction Behavior; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
chemical_list: D004364:Pharmaceutical Preparations