Therapeutics Initiative, Department of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology and Therapeutics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Annu Rev Public Health. 2012 Apr;33:259-77. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031811-124540.
Since the global withdrawal of rofecoxib (Vioxx) in 2004, concerns about public health effects of direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) have grown. A systematic review of the research evidence on behavioral, health, and cost effects, published in 2005, found four studies meeting inclusion criteria, which showed that DTCA increases prescribing volume and patient demand, and shifts prescribing. From 2005 to 2010, nine studies met similar criteria. These largely confirm previous results. Additional effects include a shift to less appropriate prescribing, differential effects by patient price sensitivity and drug type, switches to less cost-effective treatment, and sustained sales despite a price increase. Claimed effects on adherence do not stand up to scrutiny and are based mainly on negative trials. There is no evidence of improved treatment quality or early provision of needed care. If policy is to be informed by evidence, the strength of research methods and ability to assess causality need to be considered.
自 2004 年罗非昔布(万络)全球撤市以来,人们对直接面向消费者的广告(DTCA)对公众健康影响的担忧与日俱增。2005 年发表的一篇关于行为、健康和成本影响的研究证据的系统评价发现,有四项符合纳入标准的研究,这些研究表明 DTCA 增加了处方量和患者需求,并改变了处方。2005 年至 2010 年,又有九项研究符合类似标准。这些研究在很大程度上证实了先前的结果。其他影响包括处方变得不太合适,对患者价格敏感度和药物类型的影响存在差异,转而使用成本效益较低的治疗方法,以及尽管价格上涨仍持续销售。声称对药物依从性有影响的说法并没有经过仔细审查,主要基于负面试验。没有证据表明治疗质量有所提高或早期提供了所需的护理。如果政策要以证据为依据,那么需要考虑研究方法的强度和评估因果关系的能力。