[The organization of pharmaceutical care in the territory has no effect on patient compliance: the case of direct or account distribution of antidiabetics]. / L'organizzazione dell'assistenza farmaceutica sul territorio non ha effetto sulla compliance del paziente: il caso della distribuzione diretta o per conto degli antidiabetici.

OBJECTIVES: the objective of the study is to assess the effect of the delivery channel on adherence, persistence and potential wastage of new antidiabetic drugs. DESIGN: longitudinal descriptive observational study. New users were defined as subjects who received a first prescription of drugs belonging to the antidiabetic category in the period between 01.01.2021 and 31.03.2021 (index date) and who did not receive prescriptions for drugs belonging to the same category in the previous 6 months, as of 01.07.2020. Each subject was followed for a follow-up period of 9 months. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: the study examined adherence and persistence to treatment with antidiabetic drugs in Italy for patients aged>=45 years (information flow of pharmaceutical services performed in direct distribution and on behalf established by Ministerial Decree Health 31 July, 2007). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: adherence to treatment measured by the Medication Possession Rate (MPR) indicator, defined as the ratio of the number of days of therapy dispensed (calculated from DDDs) to the number of days covered by drug therapy; persistence to treatment defined as "time elapsed between the initiation and discontinuation of a prescribed drug therapy" estimated by as "time elapsed between the initiation and discontinuation of a drug therapy" estimated by Cox semi-parametric model; difference in terms of waste understood as the number of packs not fully used by non-persistent subjects. RESULTS: the analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the dispensing channels in adherence, persistence, and medication wastage (defined as the distribution of packages to non-persistent patients). Specifically, it turns out that the percentage of highly adherent subjects at 9 months is 62.2 for those on treatment in the direct distribution channel and 64.6 for those on treatment with account distribution; with regard to persistence at 9 months, however, a difference of less than one percentage point was observed between the two channels. Although this study focused on a specific therapeutic class, the results can be generalised to other high-prevalence chronic diseases. However, some limitations of the study were pointed out, such as the difficulty of replicating the results due to the variability of data depending on the drug category and the time period considered. CONCLUSIONS: the choice of distribution channel for antidiabetic drugs should not be based on adherence or persistence to treatment, but on other determinants such as cost of service and logistical complications.

[What is the real price of SOP and OTC drugs? Pilot study on paracetamol]. / Qual è il prezzo reale dei farmaci da banco (SOP) e non soggetti a prescrizione (OTC)? Studio pilota sul paracetamolo.

OBJECTIVES: to investigate the actual selling prices of over-the-counter or self-medication (OTC) and non-prescription (SOP) packages of band C medicines, which are freely set by individual pharmacies, para-pharmacies, and corners of the large-scale retail trade. Specifically, the prices charged for paracetamol 500 mg 20 tablets (20 CPR) and 30 tablets (30 CPR) in the online sale, carried out by different retail outlets authorized by the Italian Ministry of Health, were surveyed. DESIGN: cross-sectional observational descriptive study. The availability for online purchase of one or more packages of paracetamol 500 mg 20 CPR and 30 CPR was checked for each outlet considered; for sites with at least one package available for sale, the lowest real price of each of the two packages (20 and 30 CPR) was recorded, differentiating among: 1. type of outlet (pharmacy or retail outlet); 2. originator (branded) or generic (unbranded) drug; 3. city of residence of the outlet (provincial capital city or not). SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: the sample considered consists of 475 online retail sites (pharmacies, para-pharmacies, and large-scale retail stores) based in the 10 major Italian provincial capitals, including sites in the relevant provincial cities. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: the average real price, calculated as the average of all real prices recorded by packaging type; the minimum real price, i.e., or the lowest real price recorded by packaging type; the average discount, calculated as the difference between the average real price and the average value of the maximum recommended prices (set by the marketing authorization holder, AIC) for branded and unbranded packaging; the maximum discount, calculated as the difference between the minimum real price and the average value of the maximum recommended prices (set by the marketing authorization holder) for branded and unbranded packaging. RESULTS: a wide availability of paracetamol packages produced by multiple AIC holders (both branded and unbranded) was found in the country. The presence of several manufacturers of paracetamol 500 mg induces high price competition, as evident from the discounts given. However, discounts are very high on non-branded packs and lower on branded packs. However, analysis of consumption at the national level shows that price competitiveness does not reflect true market share competitiveness, as consumption is mainly concentrated on branded packs that have the highest prices. CONCLUSIONS: wide and homogeneous distribution of unbranded products from different holders is available throughout the country. These products have significantly lower prices than branded packages, and they also have heavy discounts applied (up to 70%, with minimum price per tablet going as low as 0.05 euros). However, contrary to what these premises might lead one to think, consumption is concentrated on the branded packages having the highest prices. For proper information to citizens and trade associations, it is important for the media to bring awareness of the real savings opportunities available nationwide for products of frequent and widespread use, such as the case of paracetamol 500 mg.

Monitoring the community use of antibiotics in Italy within the National Action Plan on antimicrobial resistance.

BACKGROUND: In Italy both the consumption of antibiotics and the prevalence of bacterial resistance are higher than in other European countries. In 2017, the first National Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance (PNCAR) was adopted in Italy. In response to the PNCAR two national reports on antibiotic use in the human setting have been published. This article's aim is to describe the pattern of antibiotic consumption in the community setting in Italy from 2013 to 2018. METHODS: To analyse the consumption for reimbursed antibiotics dispensed by community pharmacies different data sources were used. Consumption was measured in terms of defined daily dose (DDD), prescriptions or prevalence of use. RESULTS: In 2018, the consumption of antibiotics in Italy amounted to 16.1 DDD per 1000 inhabitants per day. The rates of consumption by geographical area were: 12.7 DDD in the north, 16.9 in the centre and 20.4 in the south. The use was greater in the extreme age groups than in the population aged from 20 to 64 years. The consumption was higher in winter season, with high peaks in the incidence of flu syndromes. In the paediatric population, a utilization rate of 1010 prescriptions per 1000 children, with a prevalence of use of 40.8%, was found. CONCLUSION: The study provides useful information on the geographical variability of antibiotic use in Italy to guide decision makers in the introduction of tailored interventions, as suggested by PNCAR, aimed at promoting a more rational use of antibiotics for humans and reducing antimicrobial resistance.

Financial Outcomes of Managed Entry Agreements for Pharmaceuticals in Italy.

Importance: Most countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development apply managed entry agreements (MEAs), reimbursement arrangements between manufacturers and payers, to pharmaceuticals. Few data exist regarding their ability to lower expenditures. Objective: To analyze the financial outcomes of MEAs for pharmaceuticals from 2019 to 2021 in Italy. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this observational study of MEAs and pharmaceutical spending in Italy, medications that were monitored through individually collected data and generated paybacks from manufacturers during the 2019 to 2021 study period were included in the analysis. Payback data were collected through pharmaceutical spending monitoring activities conducted by the Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco (Italian Medicines Agency). Expenditure data were collected through the Italian Drug Traceability System. Products were categorized by type of MEA: financial-based, outcome-based, or mixed. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was median payback as a proportion of expenditure by category of MEA. Results were also provided by subtype: cost sharing or capping models for financial-based MEAs and risk-sharing or payment-by-result models for outcome-based MEAs. Mixed MEAs were considered when medications had multiple indications with different MEA types. Results: A total of 73 medications with MEAs generated a payback by manufacturers during the study period. Six were either not reimbursable or delivered within the Italian National Health Service, and 5 had incomplete data. Of the 62 medications analyzed, 24 (38.7%) had financial-based MEAs, 30 (48.4%) had outcome-based MEAs, and 8 (12.9%) had mixed MEAs. A total payback amount of €327.5 million was calculated during the 3 years, corresponding to 0.9% of the €41.1 billion of total expenditures for medications purchased by public health facilities in Italy. Financial-based MEAs returned the highest payback revenues, €158.1 million; the outcome-based MEAs and mixed MEAs generated smaller paybacks of €74.5 million and €94.9 million, respectively. Overall, the median proportion of payback to expenditure on the medications analyzed was 3.8%. For mixed MEAs, the payback-to-expenditure proportion was 6.7%; for outcome-based MEAs, 3.3%; and for financial-based MEAs, 3.7%. Conclusions and Relevance: This observational study found limited evidence that MEAs lower pharmaceutical expenditures. Determining criteria for prioritizing MEA use, identifying potential design changes, and improving implementation may be needed in the future.

[Direct and on behalf delivery of drugs for human use: opportunities and problems.] / Distribuzione dei medicinali diretta e per conto: opportunità e criticità.

The direct delivery of medicines by public healthcare facilities (Local health authorities, hospitals) is being discussed in Italy: the article considers opportunities and drawbacks of the different options (delivery through health facilities or through specific agreements with public and private community pharmacies) with respect to the characteristics of medicinal products and the needs of patients. The authors of the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) identify the main issues to be considered for a possible shift of some drugs from direct delivery to that on behalf, and which mainly concern drugs that must in any case be administered in hospital (see drugs for intravenous use or usable only in hospitals); drugs whose dispensing requires special precautions regarding confidentiality or for which dispensing by the staff of a health facility can improve patient adherence to therapy; innovative drugs monitored through registers.

Drug Prescriptions in the Outpatient Management of COVID-19: Evidence-Based Recommendations Versus Real Practice.

Background: Evidence-based recommendations for outpatient management of COVID-19 were published by the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) to limit the use of off-label treatments. The aim of this study is to measure the use of outpatient drug treatments in a COVID-19-positive population, taking into account the Italian regulatory agency's advices. Methods: A descriptive observational study was conducted. All patients testing positive for COVID-19 residing in Lazio region, Italy, with diagnosis date between March 2020 and May 2021 were selected, and outpatient medicine prescription patterns were identified. Results: Independent of AIFA recommendations, the use of drug therapy in the management of outpatient COVID-19 cases was frequent (about one-third of the cases). The most used drug therapy was antibiotics, specifically azithromycin, despite the negative recommendation of AIFA, while the use of corticosteroids increased after the positive recommendation of regulatory agency for the use in subjects with severe COVID-19 disease. The use of hydroxychloroquine was limited to the early pandemic period where evidence on its potential benefit was controversial. Antithrombotics were widely used in outpatient settings, even if their use was recommended for hospitalized patients. Conclusion: In this study, we show a frequent use of drug therapy in the management of outpatient cases of COVID-19, mainly attributable to antibiotics use. Our research highlights the discrepancy between recommendations for care and clinical practice and the need for strategies to bridge gaps in evidence-informed decision-making.

Orphan Drug Prices and Epidemiology of Rare Diseases: A Cross-Sectional Study in Italy in the Years 2014-2019.

INTRODUCTION: It is well acknowledged that the price of orphan drugs is normally higher than that resulting from the value-based pricing. A correlation between the cost of therapy for orphan drugs and the epidemiology (prevalence and incidence) of the related rare disease can be hypothesized. METHODS: This analysis includes all approved orphan drugs by European Medicines Agency whose reimbursement was granted for the first therapeutic indication in the years 2014-2019 in Italy. Regression and correlation analyses were performed to analyze the possible correlations between the logarithm of the annual therapy cost and the epidemiology of the rare diseases, between orphan drugs consumption and epidemiology of related rare disease and between therapy cost and the consumption. RESULTS: The regression analysis between the annual cost of therapy estimated on the published ex-factory price and the prevalence showed a slightly decreasing, not statistically significant, trend (coefficient: -0.10, p-value: 0.41). The results were similar when using the price resulting from the application of Managed Entry Agreements (coefficient: -0.11, p-value: 0.40). The regression analysis between sales volume and prevalence showed a positive slope without an acceptable level of significance (p-value: 0.04). The correlation analysis between the therapy cost and the sales volume highlighted again an absence of significant association, similarly if considering only ATC L orphan drugs, or the incidence. DISCUSSION: The definition of the price of an orphan drug seems not to depend on the rarity of the disease, and sales volumes do not correlate with the epidemiology of the rare disease and with the annual cost of therapy.

[Drug use during the covid-19 pandemic in Italy.] / L'uso dei farmaci durante la pandemia di covid-19 in Italia.

The Italian Medicines Agency has started, since the first months of 2020, a monitoring of drug use during the covid-19 pandemic. This made it possible to identify specific trends in hospital and local purchases, such as the extensive use of off-label drugs with little evidence of efficacy during the first weeks of the epidemic, and to progressively assess the degree of implementation of regulatory and ministerial recommendations.Fin dalle prime fasi dell'emergenza covid-19 è emersa per l'Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco (AIFA) la necessità di monitorare in modo specifico l'uso dei farmaci utilizzati nel corso dell'epidemia. È infatti fondamentale, in un contesto caratterizzato da grande incertezza e da continui aggiornamenti delle linee guida, disporre di informazioni utili a una corretta lettura e interpretazione dei dati. È stato quindi realizzato un primo rapporto dell'Osservatorio Nazionale sull'Impiego dei Medicinali (OsMed) sull'uso dei farmaci utilizzati, a livello ospedaliero e territoriale, nella fase iniziale dell'epidemia1. Questo metteva a confronto i consumi relativi al periodo compreso tra marzo a maggio del 2020 con quelli del trimestre immediatamente precedente, da dicembre 2019 a febbraio 2020. In seguito, il 4 marzo 2021, è stato pubblicato un aggiornamento dei dati in riferimento alle fasi successive dell'epidemia2. Il monitoraggio ha preso in considerazione diverse categorie di farmaci, andando a valutare le oscillazioni negli acquisti in riferimento al progressivo aggiornamento degli indirizzi regolatori. I volumi osservati per ciascun farmaco sono stati standardizzati per 10.000 abitanti/die, andando a valutare le differenze pre- e post-covid-19 in termini di differenza assoluta, differenza percentuale e di p-value (p).

[Social inequalities in the use of medicines for the treatment of the major chronic diseases. Evidence from the AIFA Atlas.] / Disuguaglianze sociali nell'uso dei farmaci per la cura delle malattie croniche. Le principali evidenze dall'Atlante AIFA.

The Atlas of social inequalities in the use of medicines for the treatment of the major chronic diseases is the first national report published on social inequalities in the context of pharmaceutical care in Italy. The results highlighted how the socioeconomic position was strongly correlated with the use of medicines: for many therapeutic categories, the highest per capita consumption rates were recorded in the areas with a higher socioeconomic deprivation index. On the other hand, no correlations emerged between the level of deprivation and adherence and persistence to pharmacological treatment.

[Therapeutic drug plans: how many and which ones? Overview of a prescriptive and care appropriateness tool.] / Piani Terapeutici dei farmaci: quanti e quali? Fotografia di uno strumento di appropriatezza prescrittiva e assistenziale.

Therapeutic plans (TPs) were introduced in Italy in 2004 in order to ensure the continuity in the prescription of new drugs between specialist physicians and general practitioners (GPs). Over the years this prescription tool was updated several times: starting from a paper form without any template ("paper TP") to a template defined by AIFA to collect specific clinical information, up to a web-based form to collect all information into a database. Over time-critical issues concerning its usefulness have been raised, especially when AIFA established several extensions for TP validity to ensure the social distancing required by the covid-19 pandemic. Therefore, after several years from their establishment, pending adoption of necessary implementing of Ministerial Decree of 25th March 2020, a check of the actual impact of TPs is required, in order to plan their review. This study provide a detailed overview of all TPs active in Italy at the 11th May 2020. From Farmadati database, all drugs reimbursed by the National Health Service (class A drugs) and requiring TP were selected. The consumption of these drugs has been derived from OsMed Reports that make available data of medicines consumption and expenditure in the general population in Italy. The analysis showed that TP is required for the prescription of 935 medicinal products (9.6% of class-A drugs) and 147 different active substances (belonging to 34 different Therapeutic Groups and 66 subgroups). Out of these, 67 (46%) required a paper TP without any template, 72 (49%) a paper TP on AIFA template, and 8 (5%) a web-based TP. The Therapeutic Group with the largest number of active ingredients with TP were antidiabetics (19.7%), followed by immunomodulating and immunosuppressants (9.5%) and medications for asthma and COPD (6.8%). Consumption analysis of drugs with TP showed that this prescription tool covers 943,899,598 DDD per year, equal to 2,586,026 DDD/day. This means that TPs have a very high impact in terms of the prevalence of patients treated on the entire care process. Of all annual DDDs prescribed on TP, 46.8% concerned drugs with TP on template AIFA, 34.5% drugs with web-based TP, while the remaining 18.7% drugs with paper TP without a template. This analysis may provide the basis for an analytical case-by-case review of TP maintenance needs, trying to maximize the benefits of this tool and to reduce its possible adverse effects. This review could be helpful to ensure the appropriateness in the drug uses, to enhance the role of general medicine, and to simplify the pathways of millions of patients ensuring the continuity of their care.