PubMed · 8793355
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
A M Walker. 1996. Confounding by indication.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8793355/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
A formulary decision at a health care institution was studied by using two pharmacoeconomic methods. A pharmacoeconomic study was undertaken to assess the impact of a 1995 formulary decision to designate cimetidine as the primary histamine H2-receptor antagonist (H2RA) and to restrict the use of famotidine. Consecutive patients receiving either i.v. cimetidine or famotidine for stress ulcer prophylaxis were reviewed during a two-month period in 1997, and information on demographics, dosage and duration of H2RA therapy, admission date, laboratory test values, and adverse drug reactions was collected. Data for 62 patients (43 cimetidine recipients and 19 famotidine recipients) were evaluated. Therapy was categorized as successful or failed, and the data were then evaluated by decision analysis to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the agents and by multiattribute utility theory (MAUT) to incorporate a humanistic evaluation of the treatments, namely, the number of doses administered and the number of times dosages were changed. The decision tree revealed that the average cost of receiving cimetidine was $82.01 and the average cost of famotidine therapy was $92.45. The MAUT analysis showed that cimetidine was the preferred agent as long as cost was valued at greater than 60% of the decision-making process and efficacy remained equal between the two agents. Two pharmacoeconomic methods lent support to a formulary decision at a health care institution.
A therapeutic-interchange (TI) program for oral histamine H2-receptor antagonists at a hospital is described. In 1992 the pharmacy and therapeutics committee at a large teaching hospital accepted cimetidine as the preferred oral H2 antagonist. However, the program to promote cimetidine met with little success. The manufacturer of nizatidine then offered the hospital that drug at a reduced cost relative to all other members of the drug class. The committee recommended including nizatidine on the formulary; implementing a TI program so that when an order for an oral H2 antagonist was written nizatidine would be dispensed; deleting cimetidine and ranitidine tablets from the formulary; and retaining cimetidine and ranitidine oral liquid and i.v. formulations. The program was approved by the medical executive committee and was implemented in August 1994. Extensive efforts to inform the pharmacy, medical, and nursing staffs about the program were undertaken, and the pharmacy established mechanisms for monitoring compliance. Two months into the program, 97% of eligible patients were receiving nizatidine. Actual cost savings in the first four months exceeded $40,000. In July 1997 the same program was applied to famotidine, which had replaced nizatidine as the most cost-effective H2 antagonist. A successful TI program for oral H2 antagonists was achieved by gaining physician support for the program, educating providers, monitoring compliance, and responding to changes in drug costs.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.