Literature DB >> 8754700

Delisting of drugs in Ontario. How attitudes and prescribing strategies of family physicians in the Kingston area changed.

M Godwin1, J Chapman, D Mowat, W Racz, J McBride, J Tang.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess how attitudes and prescribing strategies of family physicians changed when drugs were delisted from the Ontario Drug Benefit formulary.
DESIGN: Mailed, self-administered survey.
SETTING: Family physicians' offices in Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: All family physicians practising in the Kingston, Frontenac, Lennox, and Addington Health District. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physicians were presented with six vignettes involving patients receiving a delisted drug. The choices were to recommend the patient pay for the medication, to substitute a drug still listed on the formulary, to make a special request that the medication be covered for this patient, or to offer another option. As well, the physicians were asked to indicate, on a 5-point Likert scale, their opinions regarding the effect of delisting on themselves and their patients.
RESULTS: Physicians were most likely to change to a medication that was still on the formulary. Patient sex and ability to pay were factors in physicians' decisions. Physicians believe that the delistings are not likely to have adversely affected patients' health, that noncompliance is a problem because many once-daily formulations have been removed, that suitable alternatives are not always available, and that physicians should have been consulted more before the changes were made.
CONCLUSIONS: Physicians usually substitute listed medications for medications that have been delisted. This is especially true for female patients and patients who are unable to pay.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8754700      PMCID: PMC2146792     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Fam Physician        ISSN: 0008-350X            Impact factor:   3.275


  6 in total

1.  The elimination of selected drug products from the Michigan Medicaid formulary: a case study.

Authors:  D M Smith; P L McKercher
Journal:  Hosp Formul       Date:  1984-05

2.  Prescribing and drug costs in the province of Ontario.

Authors:  J Lexchin
Journal:  Int J Health Serv       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 1.663

3.  Impact of a nationwide limited prescribing list: preliminary findings.

Authors:  C Ferrando; M C Henman; O I Corrigan
Journal:  Drug Intell Clin Pharm       Date:  1987 Jul-Aug

4.  General practitioners' attitudes towards the limited list.

Authors:  A Reilly; R J Taylor; J Webster
Journal:  J R Coll Gen Pract       Date:  1986-04

5.  Insights into public assistance medical care expenditures.

Authors:  R W Hammel
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1972-03-27       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Cost effects of restricting cost-effective therapy.

Authors:  B S Bloom; J Jacobs
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 2.983

  6 in total
  3 in total

Review 1.  Pharmaceutical policies in Canada. Issues and challenges.

Authors:  D E Angus; H M Karpetz
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Factors affecting access to drug therapy in the elderly.

Authors:  H Dombrower; T A Izukawa; S L Veinish
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 3.923

3.  Prescribing patterns for Alzheimer disease: survey of Canadian family physicians.

Authors:  Melinda Hillmer; Murray Krahn; Michael Hillmer; Pauline Pariser; Gary Naglie
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 3.275

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.