ABSTRACT
Background: Hypertension is a chronic disease and is a major risk factor for chronic heart disease, stroke, coronary heart disease, and its complications include heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, renal impairment, retinal hemorrhage, and visual impairment. Antihypertensive drugs are important to avoid such complications but compliance of patient is needed which may depend on the cost of therapy. Aim and Objective: This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of a branded generic with an economical generic. Materials and Methods: Out of 110 patients, 105 patients (53 patients in group A and 52 patients in group B) completed the study with follow-up over a period of 6 months. Group A patients received generic Telmisartan 40 mg in the beginning (0th day) which was continued for 12 weeks, cross-over was done with branded generic Telmisartan (Telma 40) which was given for further 3 months. Group B patients received the branded generic followed by generic Telmisartan in that sequence for 3 months each. Blood pressure (BP) was recorded at the baseline visit and at the end of 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 weeks. The adverse events were assessed throughout the study period. Results: Intra-group comparison show significant reduction in systolic (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) in each groups (P < 0.001) but when we compare the reduction of SBP and DBP in between the two groups the difference was not significant. Common adverse events were headache, dizziness, light-headedness, and vertigo. Conclusion: There was a huge difference between the prices of branded generic and unbranded generic. This study showed that both branded generic and unbranded generic are comparable in terms of efficacy, safety except the cost of therapy. Thus substitution of a Pharmacological generic (unbranded generic) drug could save lot of expenses.
ABSTRACT
Background: Medication errors are widespread public health issue. Prescription errors commonly results in medication error. Prescription error can be largely avoidable this study was performed with aim to point out the common mistake in the prescription which may endanger patients.Methods: Our study was cross-sectional and observational, performed in Index Medical College. 320 prescriptions were reviewed. Analysis was done for presence or absence of essential components of prescription like prescriber information’s, patients information’s, details of drug like its dosage form, strength, frequency, total duration of treatment, warnings or instruction for use. The observed data was expressed in number and percentage.Results: Patient information was complete 315 (98.44%) in prescriptions. Prescriber’s information were present in 284 (88.75%). Legibility was seen in 240 (75%). Use of generic drug, capital letters for drug name, warning are seen in 9 (2.81%), 39 (12.19%), 3 (0.94%) respectively. Completeness in terms of the name of drug, dose, strength, route, frequency, duration and dosage forms of prescribed drugs was seen in 252 (78.75%) prescriptions.Conclusions: Properly framed and written prescription can largely prevent medication error. Regular prescription audit must be carried out so that common mistake can be identified and corrective measure with the help of training session, workshop can be taken.
ABSTRACT
Male albino rats weighing between 150-225 gm fasted over night but freed having water ad libitum were used to assess the diuretic efficacy of intramuscular aminophylline and frusemide separately and concurrently after intraperitoneal 10 ml of distilled water loading. The normal rate of diuretic weight loss was less augmented by aminophylline and more augmented by frusemide. The diuretic response was more by the concurrent intramuscular administration of aminophylline and frusemide in comparison with that due to either drug alone. However, the observed diuretic response of the two drugs administered concurrently was lesser (infraadditive) than the sum of the individual diuretic response (additive).