Prescription-based cost analysis of medicines for cardiovascular risk factors at Indian Council of Medical Research-Rational Use of Medicine Centre Hospitals of India.

OBJECTIVES: India has taken several initiatives to provide health care to its population while keeping the related expenditure minimum. Since cardiovascular diseases are the most prevalent chronic conditions, in the present study, we aimed to analyze the difference in prices of medicines prescribed for three cardiovascular risk factors, based on (a) listed and not listed in the National List of Essential Medicines (NLEM) and (b) generic and branded drugs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Outpatient prescriptions for diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and dyslipidemia were retrospectively analyzed from 12 tertiary centers. The prices of medicines prescribed were compared based on presence or absence in NLEM India-2015 and prescribing by generic versus brand name. The price was standardized and presented as average price per medicine per year for a given medicine. The results are presented in Indian rupee (INR) and as median (range). RESULTS: Of the 4,736 prescriptions collected, 843 contained oral antidiabetic, antihypertensive, and/or hypolipidemic medicines. The price per medicine per year for NLEM oral antidiabetics was INR 2849 (2593-3104) and for non-NLEM was INR 5343 (2964-14364). It was INR 806 (243-2132) for generic and INR 3809 (1968-14364) for branded antidiabetics. Antihypertensives and hypolipidemics followed the trend. The price of branded non-NLEM medicines was 5-22 times higher compared to generic NLEM which, for a population of 1.37 billion, would translate to a potential saving of 346.8 billion INR for statins. The variability was significant for sulfonylureas, angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers, diuretics, and statins (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The study highlights an urgent need for intervention to actualize the maximum benefit of government policies and minimize the out-of-pocket expenditure on medicines.

Usage Pattern of Fixed-dose Combinations at ICMR Network of Rational Use of Medicine Centres across India: Recommendations for Policymakers and Prescribers.

AIM: Irrational use of medicines is a global problem. In India, one contributing factor is the availability of a large number of fixed-dose combinations (FDCs). To improve rational use and to strengthen policies, it is important to assess the usage patterns and rationality of FDCs. METHODS: This study was conducted as part of a 1-year prospective cross-sectional analysis of prescriptions in the outpatient clinics of broad specialities from 13 tertiary care hospitals across India. Five most commonly prescribed FDCs in each center were analyzed. In addition, all the prescribed FDCs were classified as per the Kokate Committee classification and it was noted whether any of the FDCs were irrational or banned as per the reference lists released by regulatory authorities. RESULTS: A total of 4,838 prescriptions were analyzed. Of these, 2,093 (43.3%) prescriptions had at least one FDC. These 2,093 prescriptions had 366 different FDCs. Of the 366 FDCs, 241 were rational; 10 were irrational; 14 required further data generation; and the remaining 96 FDCs could not be categorized into any of the above. Vitamins and minerals/supplements, antibacterial for systemic use, and drugs for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and peptic ulcer were the most used FDCs. CONCLUSION: Based on the finding that some prescriptions contained irrational FDCs, it is recommended that a rigorous, regular, and uniform method of evaluation be implemented to approve/ban FDCs and that prescribers be periodically notified about the status of the bans.

Use of drugs not listed in the National List of Essential Medicines: Findings from a prescription analysis by the Indian Council of Medical Research-Rational Use of Medicines Centres Network in tertiary care hospitals across India.

BACKGROUND: The concept of listing essential medicines can lead to improved supply and access, more rational prescribing, and lower costs of drugs. However, these benefits hinge on the prescription of drugs from an Essential Medicines List (EML). Several studies have highlighted the problem of underutilization of EMLs by prescribers. Therefore, as part of prescription research by the Indian Council of Medical Research-Rational Use of Medicines Centres Network, we evaluated the extent of prescription of drugs not listed in the National List of Essential Medicines (NLEM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prescriptions of outpatients from participating centers were included after obtaining verbal/written informed consent as approved by the Ethics Committee, and evaluated for prescription of drugs from the NLEM 2015. RESULTS: Analysis of 4838 prescriptions from 13 tertiary health-care institutes revealed that 2677 (55.33%) prescriptions had at least one non-NLEM drug prescribed. In all, 5215 (31.12%) of the total 16,758 drugs prescribed were not in NLEM. Of these, 2722 (16.24%) were single drugs and 2493 (14.88%) were fixed-dose combinations (FDCs). These comprised 700 different drug products - 346 single drugs and 354 FDCs. The average number of non-NLEM drugs prescribed per prescription was 1.08, while the average number of all drugs prescribed was 3.35 per prescription. It was also found that some of the non-NLEM drugs prescribed had the potential to result in increased cost (for example, levocetirizine), increased adverse effects (dextromethorphan), and less effectiveness (losartan) when compared to their NLEM counterparts. Nonavailability of an essential drug (oral hydroxocobalamin) was another important finding of our study. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the extent and pattern of drugs prescribed from outside the NLEM at the tertiary health-care level and the need for training and enhanced awareness among prescribers for greater utilization of the NLEM.

Spontaneous Adverse Drug Reaction Monitoring in a Tertiary Care Centre.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are associated with increased economic burden on the society. Monitoring of ADRs can help in decreasing the incidence of preventable adverse reactions. METHODS: Under Pharmacovigilance Program of India, collection and reporting of ADRs has been going on at Dayanand Medical College and Hospital since January 2011. Here, we have analyzed the individual case safety reports (ICSRs) reported and uploaded between January 2017 and June 2019 from our centre. The ADR form provided by PvPI was used for collecting information, and the causality assessment was done according to the WHO-UMC scale. RESULTS: A total of 498 ICSRs were uploaded through Vigiflow software during this period. Highest number of ADRs were recorded in the age group of 31-45 years (29.01%) and the least number of ADRs were recorded in the children less than 15 years of age (6.76%). General Medicine ward reported the highest number of ADRs and the antibiotics were most commonly associated with ADRs (26.21%), followed by antipsychotics (13.83%) and NSAIDs (12.14%). More than 90% of ADRs were non-serious (93.17%) and most of the ADRs were skin and soft tissue related (49.20%). CONCLUSION: Spontaneous reporting among indoor patients shows highest number of ADRs with use of antibiotics and almost all of the ADRs were non-serious in nature. Almost half of the total ADRs were skin and subcutaneous tissue related. Continuous efforts are required for further strengthening of the pharmacovigilance program of India.