Literature DB >> 19746847

The paradox of scored tablets: a cost-saving risk.

B De Spiegeleer1, L Van Hoorebeke, A De Spiegeleer, P Castelein, L Van Bortel.   

Abstract

One of the cornerstones of pharmacotherapy is the proper dose of medicine, which should ideally be tailored to the individual patient. However, even if clinically possible, this is economically not feasible as a too large number of different dosage strengths would be required. Therefore, a balance is required between the patient's benefit/risk and the cost to the individual and society on the other hand. Scored or splitted tablets were, and still are, often used strategies to these opposite interests, enabling more dose-flexibility, but also at the same time increasing the dose-variability as a consequence of the breaking process. The question of how to deal with this paradox was investigated by exploring the prevalence and classification of scored tablets as well as the cost-benefits. A strategy for clinical pharmacologists is presented to improve the outcome of this paradox.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19746847

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmazie        ISSN: 0031-7144            Impact factor:   1.267


  2 in total

1.  Tablet Splitting of Antiepileptic Drugs in Pediatric Epilepsy: Potential Effect on Plasma Drug Concentrations.

Authors:  Ravi Prasad Nidanapu; Sundaram Rajan; Subramanian Mahadevan; Batmanabane Gitanjali
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 3.022

2.  The Quality of Medicines Used in Children and Supplied by Private Pharmaceutical Wholesalers in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo: A Prospective Survey.

Authors:  Benedetta Schiavetti; Evelien Wynendaele; Bart De Spiegeleer; Geremie J Mbinze; Nicodème Kalenda; Roland Marini; Vera Melotte; Epco Hasker; Bruno Meessen; Raffaella Ravinetto; Josiane Van der Elst; Daniel Mutolo Ngeleka
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 2.345

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.