Search

Objective: To examine changes in healthcare utilization resulting from a formulary switch to cimetidine from nizatidine at the Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Healthcare System., Study Design: A retrospective analysis of administrative and clinical data 6 months before and 6 months after the therapeutic substitution., Methods: The 704 patients who were switched from nizatidine to cimetidine were included in the study. Administrative data included total and primary care clinic visits, emergency room visits, gastrointestinal (GI)-related radiological studies, and GI endoscopic procedures. Discharge summaries were examined, and rates of total and GI-related hospitalizations were calculated., Results: There was no evidence of increased utilization of healthcare resources during the 6 months after the formulary switch. Estimated monthly pharmaceutical savings for the Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Healthcare System were $7260., Conclusions: A formulary switch from nizatidine to cimetidine can be accomplished at significant pharmaceutical cost savings, and this retrospective study suggests that this can be done without increasing other aspects of healthcare resource utilization.

Objective: To determine whether immediate concurrent feedback (ICF) focused on inpatient omeprazole prescribing achieved more rational and cost-effective antiulcer drug prescribing and usage., Methods: In a 1400-bed teaching hospital, an audit (by specially trained personnel) was conducted to monitor inpatient prescribing of omeprazole (1) in preference to H2-antagonists and other drugs according to agreed criteria (Helicobacter pylori eradication, severe reflux esophagitis, rapid ulcer healing deemed urgent because of severe symptoms or complications, high-dose steroid therapy of > or =30 mg/day prednisolone) and (2) appropriateness of intravenous dosing (oral route not feasible or contraindicated). After baseline monitoring for 1 month, followed by relevant antiulcer drug therapy education, ICF was instituted for 1 year. This entailed explanatory memoranda requesting a change in prescribing issued to the respective medical teams of patients whose omeprazole prescription did not "conform." The main outcomes of the study were omeprazole prescription numbers per month and the proportion conforming, defined daily doses of antiulcer drugs used and corresponding expenditures, and pertinent antiulcer drug utilization data from 9 other local hospitals., Results: Baseline omeprazole prescribing conformed in 32 of 173 (18%) of the patients compared with 451 of 546 (83%) during institution of ICF (P < 0001; chi2 test). Correspondingly, average overall omeprazole and ranitidine usage (inpatient and outpatient) and expenditure decreased (44% and 45%, respectively); collectively, use of less expensive alternatives increased about 61%. Estimated savings averaged about HK$150,000 ($20,000) per month. No comparable changes in usage were noted in 9 other local hospitals., Conclusion: Regarding hospital antiulcer drugs, this ICF strategy was associated with more rational prescribing and usage, and an important saving of resources.

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.

Information about the economic benefit of new drugs is becoming increasingly important for formulary considerations, reimbursement policies and related considerations. Although economic benefits of drugs have been analysed and reported, the economic benefits of drugs have rarely been examined in the course of randomised therapeutic trials. We designed a modular survey instrument, the Resource Utilisation Survey (RUS), to collect economic outcomes in prospective trials. A pilot test of the RUS was conducted using clinical trial methods in a study of nizatidine versus placebo in preventing ulcers induced by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The purpose of the pilot study was to evaluate the RUS instrument and corresponding study design issues in clinical trials for either acute or chronic diseases. With the lessons learned from the pilot study, the RUS has been used successfully in other ongoing clinical trials.