ABSTRACT
Background: Drug promotional literature (DPL) is used by the pharmaceutical companies for promotion of their drug. It is the commonest source for providing information about the drug to the physician. According to WHO promotional literature should be reliable, truthful, informative, balanced and up to date.Methods: Study was conducted in Department of Pharmacology, Muzaffarnagar Medical College. 200 drug promotional literatures like advertisements published in medical journal, package insert of medicinal products and brochures were collected and analysed according to WHO criteria.Results: Total 200 promotional literatures were analysed. 100 promotional literatures were from the medical journal, 50 were package inserts of medicinal products and 50 were medicinal brochures. On assessing DPL using WHO criteria, all DPL mentioned brand names and dosage form (100%). Most of them published the generic name (98.5%), therapeutic uses (78%), side- effects (75%), dosage regimen (70%), contraindication (62.5%), warnings (55%), drug interaction (54%), precaution (50%), reference to scientific literature (45%), name of manufacture and distributor (99%), address of manufacturer and distributor (50%). Out of 200 DPL only 151 DPL contain references to scientific literature, 88 DPL references were retrievable and 63 were non retrievable.Conclusions: Our study shows although pharmaceutical companies are trying to adhere to the WHO criteria it is not fulfilled. As DPL are an important source of seeking information by the medical practitioner who rely on them to impart treatment to the patient, strict steps to regulate fulfilment of the WHO criteria should be taken by the government and authorities.
ABSTRACT
Background: Vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) is a chronic allergic conjunctival disease. Immunomodulatory drugs like cyclosporine is being used for its treatment. Tacrolimus is another immunomodulator drug that can be used in VKC. This study was done to compare the efficacy of tacrolimus and cyclosporine in VKC.Methods: This prospective study was conducted on 60 patients of either sex by dividing them into two groups. The first group was treated with cyclosporine (0.05%) ophthalmic eye drop and second group with tacrolimus (0.03%) ophthalmic ointment. Total five objective signs (hyperaemia, oedema, papillae, corneal involvement and tantra’s dot) and five subjective symptoms (itching, tearing, foreign body sensation, discharge and photophobia) data was collected and tabulated for statistical analysis.Results: Authors found TSSS in both groups decrease significantly (p <0.05 or p <0.01 or p <0.001) at all post periods as compared to respective predecessor periods except 4 weeks to 6 weeks in cyclosporine group and 6 weeks to 8 weeks in tacrolimus group. Similarly, for each period, on comparing the mean TSSS between the groups TSSS between the groups at all periods does not differed statistically though at final evaluation (mean change from baseline to 8 weeks), it improved 5.2% more in tacrolimus group (83.7%) than cyclosporine group (78.5%). Similarly, TOSS also decreased at all post periods except 4 weeks to 6 weeks, and 6 weeks to 8 weeks in cyclosporine group and 6 weeks to 8 weeks in tacrolimus group. Improvement in scores was 11.6% more in tacrolimus (81.6%) than cyclosporine (70.0%). Cyclosporine eye drops are associated with burning sensation and redness of eyes while transient ocular irritation was only observed side effect with tacrolimus.Conclusions: The study found tacrolimus is clinically better drug for treatment of vernal keratoconjunctivitis than cyclosporine and is also cost effective.