Bethan Williams1, David Brown. 1. School of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, University of Portsmouth, St Michael's Building, White Swan Rd, Portsmouth, UK.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate a sample of Internet sites advertising statins for sale to the general public. METHODS: A simulated customer search and evaluation of retrieved sites using evaluation tools focussing on quality (Q) and safe medicine use (SMU). Sites retrieved on 17 November 2010 were systematically analysed from 19 November to 23 December 2010. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-four sites met the inclusion criteria: 40 each for atorvastatin, pravastatin, rosuvastatin, and simvastatin and 24 for fluvastatin. Sites originated from 17 different countries. Most sites scored less than half the maximum Q score (26; range 5-17). Mean total SMU scores for each statin group were lower than 50% of the maximum (45; range of 0-28). There were no statistically significant differences between statins. General contraindications were absent in 92.4% of sites and contraindicated medicines in 47.3%. Key warnings on the appearance of symptoms associated with myopathy, liver disease, hypersensitivity, and pancreatitis were absent in 37, 48.4, 91.3, and 96.2% of sites, respectively. Most websites presented a chaotic and incomplete list of known side effects; just 13 (7.1%) presented a list compatible with current prescribing information. Only two-thirds (65.8%) attempted to describe any in lay language. CONCLUSIONS: A potential purchaser of statins is likely to encounter websites from a wide geographical base and of generally poor quality. This has potentially serious implications for the safety of purchasers who may not be aware of the problems associated with ordering medicines online or the actual medication, which they receive. Direct to consumer advertising websites need tighter controls.
PURPOSE: To evaluate a sample of Internet sites advertising statins for sale to the general public. METHODS: A simulated customer search and evaluation of retrieved sites using evaluation tools focussing on quality (Q) and safe medicine use (SMU). Sites retrieved on 17 November 2010 were systematically analysed from 19 November to 23 December 2010. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-four sites met the inclusion criteria: 40 each for atorvastatin, pravastatin, rosuvastatin, and simvastatin and 24 for fluvastatin. Sites originated from 17 different countries. Most sites scored less than half the maximum Q score (26; range 5-17). Mean total SMU scores for each statin group were lower than 50% of the maximum (45; range of 0-28). There were no statistically significant differences between statins. General contraindications were absent in 92.4% of sites and contraindicated medicines in 47.3%. Key warnings on the appearance of symptoms associated with myopathy, liver disease, hypersensitivity, and pancreatitis were absent in 37, 48.4, 91.3, and 96.2% of sites, respectively. Most websites presented a chaotic and incomplete list of known side effects; just 13 (7.1%) presented a list compatible with current prescribing information. Only two-thirds (65.8%) attempted to describe any in lay language. CONCLUSIONS: A potential purchaser of statins is likely to encounter websites from a wide geographical base and of generally poor quality. This has potentially serious implications for the safety of purchasers who may not be aware of the problems associated with ordering medicines online or the actual medication, which they receive. Direct to consumer advertising websites need tighter controls.