Fretheim Atle, Oxman Andrew D
Informed Choice Research Department, Norwegian Health Services Research Centre, P.O. Box 7004, St. Olavs plass, Oslo, Norway.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2005 Mar 11;5(1):21. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-5-21.
Inexpensive antihypertensive drugs are at least as effective and safe as more expensive drugs. Overuse of newer, more expensive antihypertensive drugs is a poor use of resources. The potential savings are substantial, but vary across countries, in large part due to differences in prescribing patterns. We wanted to describe prescribing patterns of antihypertensive drugs in ten countries and explore possible reasons for inter-country variation.
National prescribing profiles were determined based on information on sales and indications for prescribing. We sent a questionnaire to academics and drug regulatory agencies in Canada, France, Germany, UK, US and the Nordic countries, asking about explanations for differences in prescribing patterns in their country compared with the other countries. We also conducted telephone interviews with medical directors of drug companies in the UK and Norway, the countries with the largest differences in prescribing patterns.
There is considerable variation in prescribing patterns. In the UK thiazides account for 25% of consumption, while the corresponding figure for Norway is 6%. In Norway alpha-blocking agents account for 8% of consumption, which is more than twice the percentage found in any of the other countries. Suggested factors to explain inter-country variation included reimbursement policies, traditions, opinion leaders with conflicts of interests, domestic pharmaceutical production, and clinical practice guidelines. The medical directors also suggested hypotheses that: Norwegian physicians are early adopters of new interventions while the British are more conservative; there are many clinical trials conducted in Norway involving many general practitioners; there is higher cost-awareness among physicians in the UK, in part due to fund holding; and there are publicly funded pharmaceutical advisors in the UK.
Two compelling explanations the variation in prescribing that warrant further investigation are the promotion of less-expensive drugs by pharmaceutical advisors in UK and the promotion of more expensive drugs through "seeding trials" in Norway.
廉价降压药至少与昂贵药物一样有效且安全。过度使用更新、更昂贵的降压药是资源的低效利用。潜在节省数额巨大,但因国家而异,很大程度上是由于处方模式的差异。我们想描述十个国家的降压药处方模式,并探究国家间差异的可能原因。
根据销售信息和处方适应症确定国家处方概况。我们向加拿大、法国、德国、英国、美国和北欧国家的学者及药品监管机构发送了问卷,询问其国家与其他国家相比处方模式差异的解释。我们还对英国和挪威处方模式差异最大的两国的制药公司医学总监进行了电话访谈。
处方模式存在相当大的差异。在英国,噻嗪类药物占消费量的25%,而挪威的相应数字为6%。在挪威,α受体阻滞剂占消费量的8%,这一比例是其他任何国家的两倍多。解释国家间差异的因素包括报销政策、传统、存在利益冲突的意见领袖、国内制药生产以及临床实践指南。医学总监还提出了一些假设:挪威医生是新干预措施的早期采用者,而英国医生更为保守;挪威进行了许多涉及众多全科医生的临床试验;英国医生的成本意识更高,部分原因是资金持有;以及英国有公共资助的制药顾问。
英国制药顾问对廉价药物的推广以及挪威通过“播种试验”对昂贵药物的推广这两个对处方差异有说服力的解释值得进一步研究。