Use of Generic Vs Branded Drugs in Enteric Fever – A Prospective and Comparative Study
Loading...
Date
2017-07
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Ibn Sina Academy of Medieval Medicine & Sciences
Abstract
Background: The concept of generic prescription is widely accepted in various parts of the world. Nevertheless, it has failed to gain popularity in India due to factors such as non-availability and distrust on the product quality. Aim: To study cost-effective and cost-benefit analysis of antibiotic prescription in patients who had enteric fever and were given intravenous ceftriaxone. Methods: This was a prospective observational study conducted in a tertiary care cenre at World College of Medical Science and Research, Jhajjar, Haryana. 65 patients who have been diagnosed with enteric fever and were prescribed ceftriaxone were studied and their prescriptions were analyzed. 5 brands of most commonly prescribed ceftriaxone injections were chosen to analyse cost effective and cost-benefit analysis. Results: Out of 65 patients, 40 were females and 25 were males, diagnosed with enteric fever. Maximum number of patients were seen between age group of 36-50 years (38) and minimum patients belonged to age group of more than 65 years. Analysis of prescriptions revealed that majority of the patients were prescribed Branded drugs 53 (82%) than were prescribed generic drugs 12 (18%). The analysis of the cost of single dose of inj. ceftriaxone revealed that branded drugs were 8.52 % to 180.81% more in comparison with generic IV ceftriaxone. Conclusion: The cost of most commonly prescribed branded drugs was significantly higher than generic drug and prescribing branded drugs was associated with failure to take complete treatment as prescribed by treating physician.
Description
Keywords
Branded, Generic, enteric fever, ceftriaxone, Rational use of medicine
Citation
Gupta Devesh, Gupta Arvind Kumar. Use of Generic Vs Branded Drugs in Enteric Fever – A Prospective and Comparative Study. International Archives of BioMedical and Clinical Research. 2017 Jul-Sep; 3(3): 16-18