RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Patients with mixed anxiety-depressive disorder (MADD) suffer both anxiety and depression. Antidepressants, especially, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are among agents of choice for treating this condition. OBJECTIVES: This study compared the efficacy of Cipram® with its generic, citalopram. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty adult outpatients (between 18 to 55 years of age) with a diagnosis of MADD who met the trial criteria, entered this double-blind, randomized study. Subjects were assigned to receive either generic citalopram or Cipram® for 8 weeks. Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) and Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) were utilized to assess depression and anxiety at baseline, weeks 4 and 8 of the study. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 14.0. RESULTS: Twenty patients received citalopram (mean dosages of 22 mg/day during the first 4 weeks and 33 mg/day during weeks 4 to 8) and 20 received Cipram® (mean dosages of 22 mg/day during the first 4 weeks and 29 mg/day during weeks 4 to 8). Both treatments were noted to be effective in improving the symptoms of MADD at weeks 4 and 8. The mean differences of HAM-D and HAM-A between Citalopram and Cipram® groups were significantly different at the end of week 4 (HAM-D: P = 0.038, HAM-A: P = 0.025), but not at the end of week 8 (HAM-D: P = 0.239, HAM-A: P = 0.204). Both medications were tolerated well by the patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the efficacy of citalopram is similar to that of Cipram® in the treatment of MADD after 8 weeks. Meanwhile, Cipram® may reduce depression and anxiety quicker than its generic, citalopram.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: Pharmacies as direct providers of medicine and pharmaceutical services to patients have an important role in the health status of a society. The assessment of their financial situations by healthcare policy makers is necessary to prevent any negative effects on population's health. In this study we aim to analyze the financial status of pharmacies in Tehran, Iran. METHODS: This study is a cross-sectional study based on a survey. Two-hundred and eighty-eight private community daytime pharmacies in Tehran were selected by random sampling. We used two questionnaires to collect data regarding cost, expense and income factors of private pharmacies and the significance of each of them from these selected pharmacies. The data was collected in 2011 from Tehran pharmacies. Profitability of pharmacies in Tehran, Iran was calculated in its current situation and then estimated for three defined scenarios: 1. The dispensing fee is omitted (ceteris paribus), 2. Pharmacies are prohibited from selling hygienic & cosmetic products (ceteris paribus), 3. Scenarios 1 and 2 together (ceteris paribus). These data were analyzed by using SPSS and descriptive-analytic statistics. RESULTS: About 68% of interviewees responded to our questionnaires. Our analysis indicated that the average annual costs (and expenses), income and profits of pharmacies are 73,181; 106,301; and 33,120 United States Dollar (USD), respectively. The analysis indicated that omission of dispensing fee (scenario 1) and prohibition of pharmacies from selling hygienic & cosmetic products (scenario 2) would decrease income of pharmacies to 18438 and 14034 USD/year, respectively. According to respondents, the cost (or expense) of properties and buildings, energy, taxes, delays in reimbursement by insurance companies, and renting the place of pharmacy could be considered as cost factors and prescription medicines, OTC medicines, dispensing fees, hygienic & cosmetic products, and long-term payment to pharmaceutical distribution companies as income factors, which have significant effects on a pharmacy's economy. MAJOR CONCLUSIONS: According to the results of this study, regarding the pharmacies' cost (and expenses) and incomes, the omission of dispensing fees for prescriptions has considerable negative effects on the profitability of pharmacies and likely on society's health.
