4.2 Article

The impact of over-the-counter simvastatin on the number of statin prescriptions in the United Kingdom: A view from the General Practice Research Database

期刊

PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY
卷 16, 期 1, 页码 1-4

出版社

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1002/pds.1314

关键词

statins; over-the-counter; GPRD

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose The United Kingdom (UK) government changed the prescription policy of statins, making low-dose simvastatin (10 mg) available as an over-the-counter (OTC) drug in August 2004. We assessed the impact of this policy change on statin prescribing. Methods We examined all statin prescriptions in the General Practice Research Database (GPRD), a well-validated database of approximately 3.5 million patients, from the first quarter of 2001 to the second quarter of 2005. Results From 2001, the number of statin prescriptions written for GPRD patients was increasing by approximately 437 prescriptions per 100,000 people per quarter until the time of the policy change. Over the four quarters post-policy implementation, however, this trend changed abruptly (p < 0.0001) with a decrease of 281 prescriptions per 100,000 people per quarter. This decrease was not restricted to prescriptions of 10 mg statins but was also observed for statin prescriptions of >= 20 mg. Several other cardiovascular medications displayed a similar trend as that observed in the number of statin prescriptions. This trend was not observed among non-cardiovascular control medications. Conclusions Our study suggests that the policy allowing the OTC sale of 10 mg simvastatin has had a significant impact on statin prescriptions by general practitioners. However, this new policy may also be leading to less aggressive statin therapy. An alternative explanation for the observed decrease in statin prescriptions may be related to the unknown factors responsible for the overall decrease observed with other cardiovascular prescription drugs. Copyright (c) 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据