could save Australia �40m a year
Sender: owner-e-drug@usa.healthnet.org
Precedence: bulk
E-drug: Changing prescription software to favour generics
could save Australia �40m a year
---------------------------------------------
[copied as fair use. Thanks for picking this up from IP-health Richard. BS]
http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7382/184/b?etoc
BMJ 2003;326:184 ( 25 January )
News extra
Changing prescription software to favour generics could save Australia
�40m a year
Bob Burton
Canberra
A requirement by the Australian government that the default in doctors'
software be set to prescribe generic drugs has sparked opposition from
the largest pharmaceutical industry body and doctors' groups.
The existing software-which is sponsored by the manufacturers of brand
name drugs-automatically ticks the "not for substitution" box. From 1
February a prescription must not be prepared by software with the
default stating that generic drugs cannot be substituted for a brand
name drug.
Doctors will be able to select brand name drugs but they will have to
uncheck the default box. The government estimates that the change will
save the government funded Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme A$111m
(�40m; $64m; EUR61m) over four years.
Martyn Goddard, senior health policy officer at the Australian Consumers
Association, supports the measure: "It is outrageous that the prescriber
software-that is sponsored by the drug companies-directs doctors to the
brand name drugs first. We can't afford to spend 20% more on brand name
drugs just to get the brand name ... It is a luxury the system can't
afford."
Carmel Martin, director of public health and ethics at the Australian
Medical Association, argues that the change may lead to increased costs
from hospital admissions of patients (especially old patients) who take
double doses as a result of confusion. "Changing even the colour or the
packaging of the drug would make things worse than they already are,"
she said.
A spokeswoman for Senator Kay Patterson, the federal minister for health
and ageing, rejected the association's claims: "If doctors think
patients are going to be confused they should prescribe the brand name drugs."
The changes, she said, would bring Australia into line with the United
Kingdom and the United States.
Martin conceded that a press release from the association objecting to
the regulation because it will result in the "enforced use of generic drugs"
was inaccurate and said that the association did not oppose the new
regulation but feared that prescribing generics would become mandatory.
"We are concerned about enforcement in the future," she explained.
Steven Haynes, the director of strategic relations for Medicines Australia,
the largest pharmaceutical industry association, claims that doctors are
"being dictated to by health bureaucrats" and that they should have the
option to prescribe brand name drugs. Asked if he realised that doctors
could still prescribe brand name drugs, Haynes said, "Yes, you are right."
Goddard believes that claims made by doctors and brand name drug
manufacturers about adverse effects are exaggerated. He said, "The
possibility for confusion already arises when doctors change
prescriptions
from one brand name drug to another . . . You don't get the industry
pointing that out . . . The generics industry competes on price and the big
guys don't like it. That is what this is all about."
Richard Elliott
Director, Policy & Research / Directeur, politiques et recherche
Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network / R�seau juridique canadien VIH/sida
890 Yonge Street, Suite 700, Toronto, Canada M4W 3P4
Tel : +1 (416) 595-1666 Fax +1 (416) 595-0094
E-mail: relliott@aidslaw.ca Web: www.aidslaw.ca
--
To send a message to E-Drug, write to: e-drug@usa.healthnet.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe, write to: majordomo@usa.healthnet.org
in the body of the message type: subscribe e-drug OR unsubscribe e-drug
To contact a person, send a message to: e-drug-help@usa.healthnet.org
Information and archives: http://www.essentialdrugs.org/edrug