PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Anne M Holbrook

Publications and source records attributed to Anne M Holbrook.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

Are brand-name and generic warfarin interchangeable? A survey of Ontario patients and physicians.

BACKGROUND: The issue of therapeutic equivalence has been a source of controversy in Canada since the approval of generic warfarin products in 2000. OBJECTIVES: We surveyed Ontario patients and physicians on perceptions of generic warfarin and brand substitution. METHODS: Self-administered questionnaires employed 7.0-point Likert scales of agreement. Patient participants were drawn from a thromboembolism clinic in Hamilton, Ontario. Physician participants were from a random sample of 375 Ontario family physicians, internists, cardiologists and hematologists. RESULTS: Eighty-one patients responded: 52% female, mean age 63.4 years and 63% brand-name warfarin users. Overall, 33% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they would feel comfortable taking generic warfarin. However, seventeen percent agreed or strongly agreed that generic warfarin was neither as safe nor as effective as brand-name warfarin, with this view more common amongst patients taking brand-name than those taking generic warfarin. One hundred and ten (29.3%) physicians returned the survey--29% females, mean age 45.3 years, 22% family physicians. Forty-four percent agreed or strongly agreed that they would rather prescribe brand-name than generic warfarin for patients starting warfarin therapy, while 40.7% agreed or strongly agreed that they would not feel comfortable switching from brand-name to generic warfarin. However, only 19.4% of physicians who had switched patients from brand-name to generic warfarin actually reported difficulties in managing the switch. CONCLUSION: While most patients and physicians appear to have accepted the principle of therapeutic equivalence of generic and brand-name warfarin, a sizable minority has concerns that could influence prescribing and compliance.

Anticoagulants↗

Are brand-name and generic warfarin interchangeable? Multiple n-of-1 randomized, crossover trials.

BACKGROUND: Warfarin is a commonly used anticoagulant in North America. Several generic formulations have been approved, raising concern over the safety and efficacy of these products compared with brand-name Coumadin. OBJECTIVE: To ensure that generic warfarin products can be safely interchanged with Coumadin. METHODS: Multiple n-of-1 randomized, double-blind, crossover trials switched outpatients (N = 7) between a generic warfarin formulation (Apo-warfarin) and Coumadin over 30 weeks. Study patients took each drug for five 3-week periods, with international normalized ratio (INR) measurements taken twice per period. Inter- and intrapatient differences between generic warfarin and Coumadin were compared, and overall study patient results were compared with those of a Coumadin control group. RESULTS: There were no differences between warfarin products in terms of mean INR results or number of dosage adjustments required. There also was no difference in INR variation based on warfarin formulation (p > 0.69), nor was a patient and warfarin interaction found (p > 0.81). The INR results were not influenced by whether patients were maintained on Coumadin only (control group) or interchanged between Coumadin and generic warfarin (p = 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: It appears that patients can safely and effectively switch between generic warfarin and Coumadin.

Aged↗

Systematic overview of warfarin and its drug and food interactions.

BACKGROUND: Warfarin is a highly efficacious oral anticoagulant, but its use is limited by a well-founded fear of bleeding. Drug and food interactions are frequently cited as causes of adverse events with warfarin. We provide an updated systematic overview of the quality, clinical effect, and importance of these reported interactions. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, TOXLINE, IPA, and EMBASE databases from October 1993 to March 2004. Database searches combined the keyword warfarin with drug interactions, herbal medicines, Chinese herbal drugs, and food-drug interactions. STUDY SELECTION: Eligible articles contained original reports of warfarin drug or food interactions in human subjects. Non-English articles were included if sufficient information could be abstracted. DATA EXTRACTION: Reports were rated independently by 2 investigators for interaction direction, clinical severity, and quality of evidence. Quality of evidence was based on previously validated causation criteria and study design. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 642 citations retrieved, 181 eligible articles contained original reports on 120 drugs or foods. Inter-rater agreement was excellent, with weighted kappa values of 0.84 to 1.00. Of all reports, 72% described a potentiation of warfarin's effect and 84% were of poor quality, 86% of which were single case reports. The 31 incidents of clinically significant bleeding were all single case reports. Newly reported interactions included celecoxib, rofecoxib, and herbal substances, such as green tea and danshen. CONCLUSIONS: The number of drugs reported to interact with warfarin continues to expand. While most reports are of poor quality and present potentially misleading conclusions, the consistency of reports of interactions with azole antibiotics, macrolides, quinolones, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, including selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, omeprazole, lipid-lowering agents, amiodarone, and fluorouracil, suggests that coadministration with warfarin should be avoided or closely monitored. More systematic study of warfarin drug interactions in patients is urgently needed.

Anticoagulants↗

The impact of reference pricing of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents on the use and costs of analgesic drugs.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of reference pricing (RP) of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on drug subsidy program and beneficiary expenditures on analgesic drugs. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Monthly claims data from Pharmacare, the public drug subsidy program for seniors in British Columbia, Canada, over the period of February 1993 to June 2001. STUDY DESIGN: RP limits drug plan reimbursement of interchangeable medicines to a reference price, which is typically equal to the price of the lowest cost interchangeable drug; any cost above that is borne by the patient. Pharmacare introduced two different forms of RP to the NSAIDs, Type 1 in April 1994 and Type 2 in November 1995. Under Type 1 RP, generic and brand versions of the same NSAID are considered interchangeable, whereas under Type 2 RP different NSAIDs are considered interchangeable. We extrapolated average reimbursement per day of NSAID therapy over the months before RP to estimate what expenditures would have been without the policies. These counterfactual predictions were compared with actual values to estimate the impact of the policies; the estimated impacts on reimbursement rates were multiplied by the postpolicy volume of NSAIDS dispensed, which appeared unaffected by the policies, to estimate expenditure changes. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: After Type 2 RP, program expenditures declined by $22.7 million (CAN), or $4 million (CAN), annually cutting expenditure by about half. Most savings accrued from the substitution of low-cost NSAIDs for more costly alternatives. About 20 percent of savings represented expenditures by seniors who elected to pay for partially reimbursed drugs. Type 1 RP produced one-quarter the savings of type 2 RP. CONCLUSIONS: Type 2 RP of NSAIDs achieved its goal of reducing drug expenditures and was more effective than Type 1 RP. The effects of RP on patient health and associated health care costs remain to be investigated.

Aged↗

Treating insomnia.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Benzodiazepines↗

Patients' consent preferences for research uses of information in electronic medical records: interview and survey data.

OBJECTIVES: To assess patients' preferred method of consent for the use of information from electronic medical records for research. DESIGN: Interviews and a structured survey of patients in practices with electronic medical records. SETTING: Family practices in southern Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 123 patients: 17 were interviewed and 106 completed a survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients' opinions and concerns on use of information from their medical records for research and their preferences for method of consent. RESULTS: Most interviewees were willing to allow the use of their information for research purposes, although the majority preferred that consent was sought first. The seeking of consent was considered an important element of respect for the individual. Most interviewees made little distinction between identifiable and anonymised data. Research sponsored by private insurance firms generated the greatest concern, and research sponsored by foundation the least. Sponsorship by drug companies evoked negative responses during interview and positive responses in the survey. CONCLUSIONS: Patients are willing to allow information from their medical records to be used for research, but most prefer to be asked for consent either verbally or in writing.

Access to Information↗

Impact of reference-based pricing for histamine-2 receptor antagonists and restricted access for proton pump inhibitors in British Columbia.

BACKGROUND: Two programs to reduce expenditures for common gastrointestinal drugs were introduced simultaneously by British Columbia (BC) Pharmacare in 1995. Reference-based pricing restricted reimbursement for all histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) to the cost of the least expensive H2RA available, generic cimetidine. Special authority restricted reimbursement for proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) to patients who met certain eligibility criteria. We evaluated the effect of reference-based pricing for H2RAs and special authority for PPIs on dispensing and reimbursement for senior citizen beneficiaries of BC Pharmacare. METHODS: Itemized monthly claims data for upper gastrointestinal drugs were obtained from BC Pharmacare for all beneficiaries 65 years of age or older. Periods before and after implementation of reference-based pricing and special authority were compared with respect to defined daily doses dispensed per 100,000 beneficiaries, BC Pharmacare reimbursement per 100,000 beneficiaries, BC Pharmacare reimbursement per defined daily dose and beneficiary contributions per defined daily dose. We used regression models to project forward trends in expenditures observed before implementation of the new policies and hence to estimate accrued cost savings. RESULTS: Before reference-based pricing and special authority, the numbers of defined daily doses that were dispensed and total BC Pharmacare reimbursements for H2RAs appeared to be declining gradually, whereas those for PPIs were rising. With reference-based pricing, the monthly defined daily dose of cimetidine dispensed increased more than 4-fold, to 116,257 per 100,000 beneficiaries, while those of other restricted H2RAs decreased by more than half, to 50,927 per 100,000 beneficiaries. Special authority immediately reduced the dispensed volumes of PPIs by one-fourth, but growth in volume then appeared to resume at its previous rate. The estimated annualized cost savings achieved by reference-based pricing and special authority were $1.8 million to $3.2 million for H2RAs (depending on the estimation method used) and $5.5 million for PPIs. However, beneficiary contributions for H2RAs increased from negligible amounts to approximately 16% of total drug expenditures. INTERPRETATION: Reference-based pricing and special authority appear to have been successful in altering prescribing habits and reducing provincial expenditures for upper gastrointestinal drugs, but they have increased the financial burden on senior citizen beneficiaries.

Aged↗