Patterns of Prescription Switching in a Uniform-Pricing System for Multi-Source Drugs: A Retrospective Population-Based Cohort Study.

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Dong Han Kim, Song Hee Hong
{"title":"Patterns of Prescription Switching in a Uniform-Pricing System for Multi-Source Drugs: A Retrospective Population-Based Cohort Study.","authors":"Dong Han Kim, Song Hee Hong","doi":"10.3390/healthcare13182339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Generic drugs account for approximately 40% of the Korean prescription drug market, despite limited generic substitution at the point of dispensing. This suggests that switching between originator and generic drugs often occurs at the point of prescription. Physicians, in fact, have opposed pharmacy-level substitution due to concerns about the clinical equivalence of generics, despite the regulatory confirmation of their bioequivalence. Importantly, multi-source prescription switching (MSPS) may reflect discretionary prescribing behavior, underscoring the need for targeted benefit policies to enhance substitutability and promote effective competition among multi-source drugs. This study aimed to quantify the extent of physician-initiated MSPS among adults with hypertension or diabetes and to identify factors associated with these switching behaviors. <b>Methods:</b> We conducted a retrospective cohort study using Korean National Health Insurance claims data. The studied cohort consisted of patients newly initiated, between January and June 2014, on a pharmaceutically equivalent and bioequivalent antihypertensive or antidiabetic drug. Patients were followed for up to 24 months to identify MSPS episodes occurring during drug therapy courses, which were defined as 12 ± 3 consecutive visits resulting in prescriptions for pharmaceutically equivalent, bioequivalent multi-source drugs. An MSPS episode was defined as a change in product code-uniquely identifying a multi-source drug-within the same pharmaceutically equivalent drug code between any two consecutive prescriptions within the course. We estimated the mean MSPS rate and assessed variation by patient characteristics, drug types, physician practices, and geographic regions. <b>Results:</b> Among 1,325,334 identified drug therapy courses, 17.06% involved at least one MSPS. Switching rates varied substantially (coefficient of variation = 227%) by physician practice setting (e.g., public health center branches: 26%; tertiary hospitals: 15%) and by drug market size (e.g., glimepiride: 29%; cilnidipine: 1%). In contrast, patient age and gender were not associated with switching behavior. <b>Conclusions:</b> In Korea, physicians frequently switch prescriptions between originator and generic drugs, even as generic substitution at the pharmacy level remains uncommon. The substantial variation in MSPS across provider settings and drug markets-but not by patient characteristics-underscores the need for targeted pharmacy benefit policies to promote effective substitutability and competition among multi-source drugs.</p>","PeriodicalId":12977,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare","volume":"13 18","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12469595/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13182339","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Generic drugs account for approximately 40% of the Korean prescription drug market, despite limited generic substitution at the point of dispensing. This suggests that switching between originator and generic drugs often occurs at the point of prescription. Physicians, in fact, have opposed pharmacy-level substitution due to concerns about the clinical equivalence of generics, despite the regulatory confirmation of their bioequivalence. Importantly, multi-source prescription switching (MSPS) may reflect discretionary prescribing behavior, underscoring the need for targeted benefit policies to enhance substitutability and promote effective competition among multi-source drugs. This study aimed to quantify the extent of physician-initiated MSPS among adults with hypertension or diabetes and to identify factors associated with these switching behaviors. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using Korean National Health Insurance claims data. The studied cohort consisted of patients newly initiated, between January and June 2014, on a pharmaceutically equivalent and bioequivalent antihypertensive or antidiabetic drug. Patients were followed for up to 24 months to identify MSPS episodes occurring during drug therapy courses, which were defined as 12 ± 3 consecutive visits resulting in prescriptions for pharmaceutically equivalent, bioequivalent multi-source drugs. An MSPS episode was defined as a change in product code-uniquely identifying a multi-source drug-within the same pharmaceutically equivalent drug code between any two consecutive prescriptions within the course. We estimated the mean MSPS rate and assessed variation by patient characteristics, drug types, physician practices, and geographic regions. Results: Among 1,325,334 identified drug therapy courses, 17.06% involved at least one MSPS. Switching rates varied substantially (coefficient of variation = 227%) by physician practice setting (e.g., public health center branches: 26%; tertiary hospitals: 15%) and by drug market size (e.g., glimepiride: 29%; cilnidipine: 1%). In contrast, patient age and gender were not associated with switching behavior. Conclusions: In Korea, physicians frequently switch prescriptions between originator and generic drugs, even as generic substitution at the pharmacy level remains uncommon. The substantial variation in MSPS across provider settings and drug markets-but not by patient characteristics-underscores the need for targeted pharmacy benefit policies to promote effective substitutability and competition among multi-source drugs.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

多来源药物统一定价系统中的处方转换模式:一项基于人群的回顾性队列研究。
背景:仿制药约占韩国处方药市场的40%,尽管在配药方面有限的仿制药替代。这表明在原药和仿制药之间的转换经常发生在处方点。事实上,尽管监管机构确认了仿制药的生物等效性,但由于担心仿制药的临床等效性,医生们反对药房层面的替代。重要的是,多来源处方切换(MSPS)可能反映了自由决定的处方行为,强调了有针对性的福利政策的必要性,以提高可替代性和促进多来源药物之间的有效竞争。本研究旨在量化高血压或糖尿病成人中医生发起的MSPS的程度,并确定与这些转换行为相关的因素。方法:我们使用韩国国民健康保险索赔数据进行回顾性队列研究。该研究队列包括2014年1月至6月期间新开始使用药物等效和生物等效降压药或降糖药的患者。对患者进行长达24个月的随访,以确定在药物治疗过程中发生的MSPS发作,其定义为连续12±3次就诊,并开具药物等效、生物等效多源药物处方。MSPS事件被定义为产品代码的变化-在课程中任意两个连续处方之间的相同药学等效药物代码中唯一识别多来源药物。我们估计了平均MSPS率,并评估了患者特征、药物类型、医生实践和地理区域的差异。结果:在1,325,334个确定的药物治疗疗程中,17.06%至少涉及一次MSPS。切换率因医生执业环境(例如,公共卫生中心分支机构:26%;三级医院:15%)和药物市场规模(例如,格列美脲:29%;西尼地平:1%)而有很大差异(变异系数= 227%)。相比之下,患者的年龄和性别与转换行为无关。结论:在韩国,医生经常在原药和仿制药之间切换处方,即使在药房层面的仿制药替代仍然不常见。不同提供者设置和药物市场的MSPS存在巨大差异,但不是根据患者特征,这强调了有针对性的药房福利政策的必要性,以促进多来源药物之间的有效替代和竞争。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Healthcare
Healthcare Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: Healthcare (ISSN 2227-9032) is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal (free for readers), which publishes original theoretical and empirical work in the interdisciplinary area of all aspects of medicine and health care research. Healthcare publishes Original Research Articles, Reviews, Case Reports, Research Notes and Short Communications. We encourage researchers to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. For theoretical papers, full details of proofs must be provided so that the results can be checked; for experimental papers, full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. Additionally, electronic files or software regarding the full details of the calculations, experimental procedure, etc., can be deposited along with the publication as “Supplementary Material”.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信