J V Jolleys1, F Olesen. 1. Department of General Practice, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, U.K.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) has been shown to vary from one country to another through international studies of sample populations and by comparison of data obtained from comparable national studies. Drawing international prescribing comparisons is very difficult as data sources are few, incomplete and of uncertain accuracy and comparability. As an alternative to direct prescribing information, pharmaceutical sales information indicates medication used. This paper sought to demonstrate international differences in the use of HRT using an economic analysis methodology based on national pharmaceutical sales statistics. METHODS: A recognised economic analysis methodology was used to translate 1991/1992 pharmaceutical sales data into women treatment years of HRT used in each country. From this was calculated the percentage of the female population in each country, eligible for HRT, who would have been taking HRT. RESULTS: The results show a wide variance in the percentage of the eligible female population in each country calculated to have been taking HRT, from <1%-20%. The results indicated that HRT usage fell into three groupings: USA being the greatest user with UK and Scandinavian countries in the middle group and continental Europe having the lowest usage. CONCLUSIONS: National patterns of HRT usage, as calculated by this study, correlate well with those of other studies. Since similar morbidity could be expected as menopause is a naturally occurring event, not a disease, possible reasons for the variance in national prescribing patterns are discussed. The study indicates the need for further research on health beliefs and physicians' and women's attitudes to HRT in different countries to explain the variance in HRT usage, also considering access to healthcare, in particular women's health services. It confirms the validity of using economic analysis of pharmaceutical sales data as a proxy for prescribing data in the arena of prescribing research.
OBJECTIVES: The use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) has been shown to vary from one country to another through international studies of sample populations and by comparison of data obtained from comparable national studies. Drawing international prescribing comparisons is very difficult as data sources are few, incomplete and of uncertain accuracy and comparability. As an alternative to direct prescribing information, pharmaceutical sales information indicates medication used. This paper sought to demonstrate international differences in the use of HRT using an economic analysis methodology based on national pharmaceutical sales statistics. METHODS: A recognised economic analysis methodology was used to translate 1991/1992 pharmaceutical sales data into women treatment years of HRT used in each country. From this was calculated the percentage of the female population in each country, eligible for HRT, who would have been taking HRT. RESULTS: The results show a wide variance in the percentage of the eligible female population in each country calculated to have been taking HRT, from <1%-20%. The results indicated that HRT usage fell into three groupings: USA being the greatest user with UK and Scandinavian countries in the middle group and continental Europe having the lowest usage. CONCLUSIONS: National patterns of HRT usage, as calculated by this study, correlate well with those of other studies. Since similar morbidity could be expected as menopause is a naturally occurring event, not a disease, possible reasons for the variance in national prescribing patterns are discussed. The study indicates the need for further research on health beliefs and physicians' and women's attitudes to HRT in different countries to explain the variance in HRT usage, also considering access to healthcare, in particular women's health services. It confirms the validity of using economic analysis of pharmaceutical sales data as a proxy for prescribing data in the arena of prescribing research.
Authors: Manja Koch; Jeremy D Furtado; Gordon Z Jiang; Brianna E Gray; Tianxi Cai; Frank Sacks; Anne Tjønneland; Kim Overvad; Majken K Jensen Journal: J Lipid Res Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 5.922