Branded versus generic drug use in chronic disease management in Hong Kong-perspectives of health care professionals and the general public.

Introduction: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the understanding of generic substitution among health care professionals and members of the general public ("general public") in Hong Kong.
Methods: This cross-sectional descriptive study was performed by using a self-completed anonymous questionnaire from March 2015 to May 2017. The questionnaire included demographic data, knowledge of generic drugs, experiences of generic substitution, and views on policy.
Results: A total of 2106 general public, 73 doctors, 22 nurses, and 50 pharmacists responded the questionnaire. In all, 41.2% of the general public was aware that generic drugs have the same active ingredients. Although a majority of the health care professionals knew that generic drugs have the same active ingredients (doctors: 79.5%; nurses: 86.4%; pharmacists: 98.0%), many were unaware of bioequivalence (doctors: 37.0%; nurses: 18.2%; pharmacists: 50.0%). "Efficacy" was ranked as the primary concern among all groups; a substantial portion of respondents reported experiencing adverse drug reactions upon generic substitution (general public: 26.6%; doctors: 23.3%; nurses: 9.1%; pharmacists: 42.0%). At least half of the general public, nurses, and pharmacists considered that patients should be given a choice for generic substitution. However, fewer than one-fifth of doctors and nurses and approximately one-third of pharmacists considered that patient consent was needed prior to generic substitution, compared with approximately two-thirds of the general public.
Conclusion: The knowledge and perception of generic substitution remains low, both in the general public and among health care professionals. This knowledge deficit could potentially lead to different perspectives among stakeholders regarding generic substitution.