Advertisement

Generic and therapeutic substitution: ethics meets health economics

  • Steven SimoensEmail author
Letter to the Editor

To the Editor:

In their commentary on the ethical aspects of generic and therapeutic substitution, AlAmeri et al. [1] argued that the health economic rationale for promoting substitution, i.e. the creation of cost savings to the health care system, may be harmful to patients and, thus, that substitution is unethical. They then go on to state that the debate on whether or not to substitute must be exclusively informed by the individual patient’s clinical interests and that substitution driven by economic interests is not compatible with patient-centered medicine. In putting these arguments forward, the authors misinterpret the ethical implications of a health economic framework by focusing on the individual patient’s perspective to the detriment of the societal perspective.

The ethical dimension underpinning health economics is that a society wishes to maximise population health subject to a budget constraint. This idea is reflected in the term ‘health economics’, which consists of two...

Keywords

Population Health Generic Medicine Medicare Part Improve Population Health Total Health Care Cost 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    AlAmeri M, Epstein M, Johnston A. Generic and therapeutic substitutions: are they always ethical in their own terms? Pharm World Sci. 2010;32(6):691–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Plans-Rubio P. The cost effectiveness of statin therapies in Spain in 2010, after the introduction of generics and reference prices. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2010;10(6):369–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kohl H, Shrank WH. Increasing generic drug use in Medicare Part D: the role of government. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007;55(7):1106–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Davit BM, Nwakama PE, Buehler GJ, Conner DP, Haidar SH, Patel DT, et al. Comparing generic and innovator drugs: a review of 12 years of bioequivalence data from the United States Food and Drug Administration. Ann Pharmacother. 2009;43(10):1583–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kesselheim AS, Stedman MR, Bubrick EJ, Gagne JJ, Misono AS, Lee JL, et al. Seizure outcomes following the use of generic versus brand-name antiepileptic drugs: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Drugs. 2010;70(5):605–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gagne JJ, Avorn J, Shrank WH, Schneeweiss S. Refilling and switching of antiepileptic drugs and seizure-related events. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2010;88(3):347–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Pharmaceutical SciencesResearch Centre for Pharmaceutical Care and Pharmaco-economics, Katholieke Universiteit LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations