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.

Evaluation of prescriptions from tertiary care hospitals across India for deviations from treatment guidelines & their potential consequences.

BACKGROUND OBJECTIVES: Irrational prescribing practices have major consequences on patient safety and also increase the economic burden. Real-life examples of impact of irrational prescription have potential to improve prescribing practices. In this context, the present study aimed to capture and evaluate the prevalence of deviations from treatment guidelines in the prescriptions, potential consequence/s of the deviations and corrective actions recommended by clinicians. METHODS: It was a cross-sectional observational study conducted in the outpatient departments of tertiary care hospitals in India wherein the 13 Indian Council of Medical Research Rational Use of Medicines Centres are located. Prescriptions not compliant with the standard treatment guidelines and incomplete prescriptions with respect to formulation, dose, duration and frequency were labelled as 'prescriptions having deviations'. A deviation that could result in a drug interaction, lack of response, increased cost, preventable adverse drug reaction (ADR) and/or antimicrobial resistance was labelled as an 'unacceptable deviation'. RESULTS: Against all the prescriptions assessed, about one tenth of them (475/4838; 9.8%) had unacceptable deviations. However, in 2667/4838 (55.1%) prescriptions, the clinicians had adhered to the treatment guidelines. Two thousand one hundred and seventy-one prescriptions had deviations, of which 475 (21.9%) had unacceptable deviations with pantoprazole (n=54), rabeprazole+domperidone (n=35) and oral enzyme preparations (n=24) as the most frequently prescribed drugs and upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) and hypertension as most common diseases with unacceptable deviations. The potential consequences of deviations were increase in cost (n=301), ADRs (n=254), drug interactions (n=81), lack of therapeutic response (n=77) and antimicrobial resistance (n=72). Major corrective actions proposed for consideration were issuance of an administrative order (n=196) and conducting online training programme (n=108). INTERPRETATION CONCLUSIONS: The overall prevalence of deviations found was 45 per cent of which unacceptable deviations was estimated to be 9.8 per cent. To minimize the deviations, clinicians recommended online training on rational prescribing and administrative directives as potential interventions.

Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Survey Regarding High Alert Medication Among Resident Doctors in a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital in Eastern India.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors are a reality in all settings where medicines are prescribed, dispensed, and used. High-alert medications (HAM) are those that bear a heightened risk of causing significant harm to the patient if used erroneously. Though mishaps with HAM may not be more common than with other drugs, the consequences of error with them can be especially serious. We conducted a survey on knowledge, attitude, and practice, among residents working in a teaching hospital to assess the ground situation regarding HAM awareness and handling. METHODS: We approached 492 residents among the approximately 600 currently working through purposive sampling. Residents in all disciplines (clinical, paraclinical, and preclinical) were targeted. A structured questionnaire with 54 questions, pilot-tested on 20 volunteer residents, was used for data collection. The questionnaire was administered to residents through face-to-face interviews by two raters while they were on duty, but not during rush hours. RESULTS: Of the total 261 responses received, 32.33% respondents correctly defined or explained the meaning of the term 'medication error'. Knowledge regarding the difference between medication error and adverse events did not get reflected in 68.38% of the participants, and only 16.86% were able to name the relevant group of medicines as HAM. Regarding attitude in dealing with HAM, the majority believed that taking the history of drug allergy and reconciling all prescription and over-the-counter (OTC) drugs already being used before prescribing or using medicine is important. In practice, most respondents followed protocols but not routinely. Several potential errors in practice were identified. CONCLUSION: The current situation requires corrective action. There is an urgent need for improving awareness regarding HAM for the sake of patient safety. The pharmacology department can take the lead in designing awareness campaigns with support from the hospital administration.