4.2 Article

What are the obstacles to generic substitution?: An assessment of the behaviour of prescribers, patients and pharmacies during the first year of generic substitution in Sweden

Journal

PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY
Volume 14, Issue 5, Pages 341-348

Publisher

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1002/pds.1055

Keywords

generic substitution; health care reform; health care cost; Sweden; generic medicines

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose The aim of the present study was to investigate obstacles to generic substitution and savings achieved during the first year after Sweden introduced generic substitution in October 2002. Methods Normal prescriptions encompassed by generic substitution were included. Data on dispensed prescriptions in the Vastra Gotaland region was obtained from the National Corporation of Swedish Pharmacies. The outcome variables were investigated in three categories of drugs represented by two indicator drugs each. Results In total, 501400 dispensed prescriptions of six indicator drugs were analysed. The prescriber opposed substitution in 1-8% of the dispensed prescriptions, varying between the indicator drugs. Patients declined substitution more frequently when the average saving per substitution was low. Substitution occurred most frequently in indicator drugs where the average saving per substitution was high. The total possible saving was 26 million Swedish krona (Swedish krona 1 = U.S. $0.13) for the indicator drugs. The actual saving achieved by substitution was on average 60% of the total possible savings and was largely dependent on the extent to which the pharmacies kept the cheapest brand in stock. Conclusions Generic substitution has been implemented in practice although it did not reach full dividend during the first year. The potential savings from extended use of generic substitution are substantial. Copyright (c) 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available