Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (pharmaceutical + benefit_scheme)
Selected AbstractsWhat happened to the prescribing of other COX-2 inhibitors, paracetamol and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs when rofecoxib was withdrawn in Australia?,PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, Issue 11 2007Nadia Barozzi Abstract Objectives To analyse how the prescribing of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors, non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (ns-NSAIDs) and paracetamol (acetaminophen) changed when rofecoxib was withdrawn in 2004. Method COX-2 inhibitors, paracetamol and ns-NSAID's use was measured using dispensing data for concession beneficiaries subsidized by the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefit Scheme (PBS) for the period of 1997,2005. Data were downloaded from the Medicare Australia website and converted, according to the World Health Organization (WHO) Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC)/Defined Daily Dose (DDD) (2005), to DDD/1000 concession beneficiaries/day. Results In the period 2000,2004, the use of COX-2 inhibitors was progressively increased. Overall NSAID's use changed from approximately 80 to 105,DDD/1000 concession beneficiaries/day while a decrease of ns-NSAIDs from about 70 to 40,DDD/1000 concession beneficiaries/day was observed. Following rofecoxib withdrawal, the overall NSAIDs use declined. In 2005, celecoxib prescription declined (23%) while prescription of meloxicam increased by 62%. Use of paracetamol was steady over the period 1997,2004 (around 40,DDD/1000 concession beneficiaries/day). In April 2005, a slight increase in paracetamol use was observed. Conclusion Our analysis showed that COX-2 inhibitors prescribing markedly influenced the overall NSAIDs prescribing in Australia. When COX-2 inhibitors were introduced their uptake was rapid and extensive. Following rofecoxib withdrawal, the total overall dispensing of NSAIDs returned to a similar value as before COX-2 inhibitors' introduction. The decrease was due both to rofecoxib withdrawal and to a reduction in celecoxib prescribing. However, meloxicam use increased. Paracetamol prescribing was steady, between 1997 and 2005 and was not affected when the COX-2 inhibitors were introduced on to the market and after rofecoxib withdrawal, rather than increasing as might have been anticipated after rofecoxib withdrawal. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Ototoxic eardrops and tympanic membrane perforations: Time for a change?JOURNAL OF PAEDIATRICS AND CHILD HEALTH, Issue 8 2005Harvey Coates Abstract: Until recently the only available antibiotic eardrops for treatment of the discharging middle ear and mastoid cavity have been potentially ototoxic. With the advent of non-ototoxic fluoroquinolone eardrops, consensus panels in the USA, Canada and the UK have advocated the preferential use of these agents in the open middle ear. However, in Australia, no fluoroquinolone topical agent is approved for use with tympanic membrane perforations, and when used as an ,off label' eardrop, none is on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. This creates an ethical dilemma, particularly with best practice management of chronic suppurative otitis media in indigenous children. Despite concerns regarding resistance issues with ototopical use of systemic antibiotics, bacterial resistance has not been documented in major studies. For equity and ethical reasons, Australian regulatory authorities should consider approving a sterile non-ototoxic eardrop for use in the open middle ear. [source] Changes in utilisation of anticholinergic drugs after initiation of cholinesterase inhibitors,PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, Issue 8 2009M Robinson BPharm, MedSc Abstract Purpose Cholinesterase Inhibitors (CEIs) have been subsidised in Australia since February 2001 for cognitive decline associated with mild to moderate Alzheimer disease. The number of people with Alzheimer Disease is expected to increase, with a continuing increase in the number of people receiving CEI's. Many anticholinergic drugs (ACDs) are also prescribed to people receiving CEIs and concerns about the impact of the interaction have been raised. The aim of this study was to describe co-prescribing of a group of important ACDs in patients initiating treatment with CEIs in Australia. Methods Pharmacy claim data for Australia (Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme) was examined for the period 1 April to 30 June 2006. All selected prescriptions supplied for patients receiving their first supply of any CEIs (initiators) were extracted for 14 weeks prior to and post the first date of supply. The numbers of initiating people co-administering CEIs and ACDs was examined. Results 5797 persons received their first prescription for CEIs between 1 April and 30 June 2006. Thirty-two per cent of these also received prescriptions for at least one ACD. There was a statistically significant increase in the number of initiators receiving an ACD. The significant increase was in patients receiving atypical antipsychotics. There was a trend towards an increase in patients receiving oxybutynin. Conclusions Extent of co-administration of ACDs and CEIs is similar to other international studies however the most significant increase is seen in patients receiving atypical antipsychotics. The implications of adding atypical antipsychotics are potential for worsening disease, increasing adverse effects and increased health resource utilisation in this vulnerable group. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Impact of the Minimum Pricing Policy and introduction of brand (generic) substitution into the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme in AustraliaPHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, Issue 4 2001Peter McManus Abstract Purpose To describe the effects of introducing the Minimum Pricing Policy (MPP) and generic (brand) substitution in 1990 and 1994 respectively on the dispensing of Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) prescriptions both at the aggregate and individual patient level. Methods The relative proportion of prescriptions with a brand premium and those at benchmark was examined 4 years after introduction of the MPP and again 5 years later after generic substitution by pharmacists was permitted. To determine the impact of a price signal at the individual level, case studies involving a patient tracking methodology were conducted on two drugs (fluoxetine and ranitidine) that received a brand premium. Results From a zero base when the MPP was introduced in 1990, there were 5.4 million prescriptions (17%) dispensed for benchmark products 4 years later in 1994. At this stage generic (brand) substitution by pharmacists was then permitted and the market share of benchmark brands increased to 45% (25.2 million) by 1999. In the patient tracking studies, a significantly lower proportion of patients was still taking the premium brand of fluoxetine 3 months after the introduction of a price signal compared with patients taking paroxetine which did not have a generic competitor. This was also the case for the premium brand of ranitidine when compared to famotidine. The size of the price signal also had a marked effect on dispensing behaviour with the drug with the larger premium (fluoxetine) showing a significantly greater switch away from the premium brand to the benchmark product. Conclusions The introduction in 1990 of the Minimum Pricing Policy without allowing generic substitution had a relatively small impact on the selection of medicines within the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. However the effect of generic substitution at the pharmacist level, which was introduced in December 1994, resulted in a marked increase in the percentage of eligible PBS items dispensed at benchmark. Case studies showed a larger premium resulted in a greater shift of patients from drugs with a brand premium to the benchmark alternative. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Increased patient co-payments and changes in PBS-subsidised prescription medicines dispensed in Western AustraliaAUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, Issue 3 2009Anna Hynd Abstract Objective: To determine whether a 24% increase in patient co-payments in January 2005 and two related co-payment changes for medicines subsidised under the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) were associated with changes in dispensings in Western Australia (WA). Method: We analysed aggregate monthly prescription counts and defined daily dose per 1,000 population per day (DDD/1,000/day) for atypical antipsychotics, combination asthma medicines, HmgCoA reductase inhibitors (statins) and proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs). Trends pre and post the co-payment increase in January 2005 were compared. Results: In three of the four categories examined, prescription counts were significantly lower following the increase in co-payment thresholds. Compared with dispensings prior to the co-payment increase, prescriptions fell by 8% for combination asthma medicines (p<0.001), 9% for PPIs (p<0.001) and 5% for statins (p<0.001). Following the rise in co-payments, DDD/1,000/day decreased for all four categories. Decreases in dispensings to concessional beneficiaries were between 4% and 5% larger than for general beneficiary patients. Conclusions and Implications: The reduction in the both prescription counts and DDD/1,000/day observed for combination asthma medicines, PPIs and statins, which all remained above co-payment thresholds, suggests the increase in PBS co-payments has affected utilisation of these subsidised medicines. The results indicate that increases in patient contributions particularly impact on concessional patients' ability to afford prescription medicines. [source] | ||||||||||