Advertisement

International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy

, Volume 35, Issue 3, pp 386–392 | Cite as

Worldwide analysis of factors associated with medicines compendia publishing

  • Blanca Arguello
  • Fernando Fernandez-LlimosEmail author
Research Article
  • 146 Downloads

Abstract

Background Medicines compendia, also called formularies, are the most commonly used drug information source among health care professionals. Objective The aim was to identify the countries publishing medicines compendia and the socio-demographic factors associated to this fact. Additionally, we sought to determine the use of foreign compendia in countries lacking their own. Setting Global web-based survey. Method Healthcare practitioners and researchers from 193 countries worldwide were invited to complete a web-based survey. The questionnaire investigated the existence of a national compendium, or the use of foreign compendia in the absence of one. Demographic and socioeconomic variables were used to predict compendia publishing through a multivariate analysis. Main outcome measure Existence of national medicines compendia and foreign compendia used. Results Professionals from 132 countries completed the survey (response rate at a country level 68.4 %, comprising 90.9 % global population). Eighty-four countries (63.6 %) reported publishing a medicines compendium. In the multivariate analysis, only two covariates had significant association with compendia publishing. Being a member of the Organisation for the Economic Cooperation and Development was the only variable positively associated with compendia publishing (OR = 37.5; 95 % CI = 2.3:599.8). In contrast, the countries that listed French as an official language were less likely to publish a compendium (OR = 0.07; 95 % CI = 0.007:0.585). Countries without national compendia reported using the British National Formulary most commonly, followed by the Dictionnaire Vidal. Conclusion Publication of medicines compendia is associated with socio-economic development. Countries lacking a national compendium, use foreign compendia from higher-income countries. Creating an international medicines compendium under the leadership of the World Health Organisation, rather than merely a ‘model’, would reduce the risks of using information sources not-adapted to the necessities of developing countries.

Keywords

Drug information services Economic development Reference books, medical Survey 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We like to thank all respondents for their valuable contributions.

Funding

This study had not received any external funding.

Conflicts of interest

Authors declare no conflict of interests regarding this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Parker WA. The compendium of pharmaceuticals and specialties as a drug information resource for treatment of acute drug overdose. Can Fam Physician. 1979;25:211–5.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ely JW, Burch RJ, Vinson DC. The information needs of family physicians: case-specific clinical questions. J Fam Pract. 1992;35:265–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cohen JS. Adverse drug effects, compliance, and initial doses of antihypertensive drugs recommended by the Joint National Committee vs the Physicians’ Desk Reference. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:880–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Murphy AL, Fleming M, Martin-Misener R, Sketris IS, Maccara M, Gass D. Drug information resources used by nurse practitioners and collaborating physicians at the point of care in Nova Scotia, Canada: a survey and review of the literature. BMC Nurs. 2006;5:5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Andrews JE, Pearce KA, Ireson C, Love MM. Information-seeking behaviors of practitioners in a primary care practice-based research network (PBRN). J Med Libr Assoc. 2005;93:206–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wong CM, Ko Y, Chan A. Clinically significant drug–drug interactions between oral anticancer agents and nonanticancer agents: profiling and comparison of two drug compendia. Ann Pharmacother. 2008;42:1737–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Laing R, Tisocki K. How to develop a national formulary based on the WHO model formulary: a practical guide. Geneve: WHO; 2004.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    American Society of Health-System Pharmacists. AHFS drug information. Washington, DC. http://www.ahfsdruginformation.com/products_services/di_ahfs.aspx. Accessed 1 Oct 2012.
  9. 9.
    Truven Health Analytics. DRUGDEX system. Ann Arbor, MI. http://www.truvenhealth.com/your_healthcare_focus/hospital_patient_care_decisions/medication_management.aspx. Accessed 1 Oct 2012.
  10. 10.
    Elsevier. Clinical pharmacology. Tampa, FL. http://www.clinicalpharmacology.com/. Accessed 1 Oct 2012.
  11. 11.
    National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN drugs and biologics compendium (NCCN compendium®). Fort Washington, PA. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/drug_compendium/content/contents.asp. Accessed 1 Oct 2012.
  12. 12.
    PDR books. 2013 Physicians’ Desk Reference®. Chestertown, MD. http://www.pdrbooks.com/prod/2013-Editions/Product-Catalog_95/2013-Physicians-Desk-Reference-_89.aspx. Accessed 1 Oct 2012.
  13. 13.
    Hedegaard U, Damkier P. Problem-oriented drug information: physicians’ expectations and impact on clinical practice. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2009;65:515–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Davies K, Harrison J. The information-seeking behaviour of doctors: a review of the evidence. Health Info Libr J. 2007;24:78–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cohen JS. Dose discrepancies between the Physicians’ Desk Reference and the medical literature, and their possible role in the high incidence of dose-related adverse drug events. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:957–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Morgan MA, Cragan JD, Goldenberg RL, Rasmussen SA, Schulkin J. Obstetrician-gynaecologist knowledge of and access to information about the risks of medication use during pregnancy. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2010;23:1143–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vitry AI. Comparative assessment of four drug interaction compendia. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;63:709–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Trifiro G, Corrao S, Alacqua M, Moretti S, Tari M, Caputi AP, Arcoraci V. Interaction risk with proton pump inhibitors in general practice: significant disagreement between different drug-related information sources. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2006;62:582–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wall AJ, Bateman DN, Waring WS. Variability in the quality of overdose advice in summary of product characteristics (SPC) documents: gut decontamination recommendations for CNS drugs. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2009;67:83–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Reggi V, Balocco-Mattavelli R, Bonati M, Breton I, Figueras A, Jambert E, Kopp C, Montane E, Rago L, Rocchi F. Prescribing information in 26 countries: a comparative study. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2003;59:263–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Warner-Smith M. The challenge of developing drug information systems in Africa. Bull Narcot. 2003;55:95–8.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Flores C. Drug Information Centers in developing countries and the promotion of rational use of drugs: a viewpoint about challenges and perpectives. Int Pharm J. 2004;18:21–3.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    US Congress Office of Technology Assessment. Drug labeling in developing countries. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1993. ISBN: 0-16-041628-0.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    World Health Organization. Index of pharmacopoeias. Geneve: WHO; 2006. http://www.who.int/medicines/areas/quality_safety/quality_assurance/resources/index-of-pharmacopoeias16032012.pdf. Accessed May 2012.
  25. 25.
    U.S. Department of State. Independent States in the World. Washington, DC. http://www.state.gov/s/inr/rls/4250.htm. Accessed 29 Aug 2011.
  26. 26.
    The World Bank. Data: the World Bank. Washington, DC. http://data.worldbank.org/. Accessed 30 Aug 2011.
  27. 27.
    World Health Organization. WHO: data and statistics. Geneve: WHO. http://www.who.int/research/en/. Accessed 30 Aug 2011.
  28. 28.
    Capital Alpen. Gulf cooperation council healthcare industry. Dubai: Alpen Capital; 2009.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    OECD. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation And Development (OECD). Paris. http://www.oecd.org. Accessed 04 Sept 2011.
  30. 30.
    OECD: Chair of the Heads of Delegation Working Group on the Enlargement Strategy and Outreach ASN. A strategy for enlargement and outreach. Paris: OECD; 2004.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Frueh FW, Amur S, Mummaneni P, Epstein RS, Aubert RE, DeLuca TM, Verbrugge RR, Burckart GJ, Lesko LJ. Pharmacogenomic biomarker information in drug labels approved by the United States food and drug administration: prevalence of related drug use. Pharmacotherapy. 2008;28:992–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    World Health Organization. WHO model formulary. Geneve: WHO; 2008. ISBN 978-92-4-154765-9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Social Pharmacy, Faculdade de FarmaciaUniversidade de LisboaLisbonPortugal
  2. 2.Pharmacoepidemiology and Social Pharmacy UnitResearch Institute for Medicines and Pharmaceutical Sciences (iMed.UL), University of LisbonLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations