客观评估非专利噻洛尔滴眼液剂量数量的变化及其成本效益。

J. Isaac, I. Galadima, Toyosi Olatunji Kazeem
{"title":"客观评估非专利噻洛尔滴眼液剂量数量的变化及其成本效益。","authors":"J. Isaac, I. Galadima, Toyosi Olatunji Kazeem","doi":"10.4314/jopat.v22i1.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"First, this study aims to ascertain if truly the generic timolol eye drops circulating in Abuja and it environ are interchangeable. Secondly, we explore their cost effectiveness in naira based on the dispensing position. Using official guidelines, we assessed seven generic timolol ophthalmic preparations for organoleptic, pH, viscosity, sterility, and assay test. After this, they were tested in the vertical (90 ⁰) and horizontal (30 ⁰) positions for filled volume in a bottle, the total number of drops per bottle, drops per mL; and eventually the total number of bottles needed per year, cost per year and their cost effectiveness per mmHg were extrapolated. All brands were colorless and devoid of particulate contamination. Assay, pH, and viscosity values were within the compendia specification (BP and USP) for eye drops. The sterility assay showed no evidence of bacterial or fungi growth. All brands had actual filled volume less than or equal to the stated label claim. Their drops per 5 mL bottle range from 141-169 and 122-139 when dispensed in vertical and horizontal positions respectively; while for brands with 10 mL label volume, they range from 305-321 and 299-309 drops per bottle for vertical and horizontal dispensing respectively. Brand T1 (which is the most expensive) would need two bottles less in a year if the medication were to be dispensed vertically, amounting to N 3,200.00 ($ 7.04) reduction in treatment cost and a 45 % improvement in cost-effectiveness per intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction per year. In conclusion, the dispensing technique played a significant role in the number of drops per bottle, this would however impact on the treatment cost of glaucoma patient placed on timolol eye drop.","PeriodicalId":7592,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Phytomedicine and Clinical Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Objective assessment of the variation in number of doses of generic timolol eye drops along with their cost effectiveness.\",\"authors\":\"J. Isaac, I. Galadima, Toyosi Olatunji Kazeem\",\"doi\":\"10.4314/jopat.v22i1.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"First, this study aims to ascertain if truly the generic timolol eye drops circulating in Abuja and it environ are interchangeable. Secondly, we explore their cost effectiveness in naira based on the dispensing position. Using official guidelines, we assessed seven generic timolol ophthalmic preparations for organoleptic, pH, viscosity, sterility, and assay test. After this, they were tested in the vertical (90 ⁰) and horizontal (30 ⁰) positions for filled volume in a bottle, the total number of drops per bottle, drops per mL; and eventually the total number of bottles needed per year, cost per year and their cost effectiveness per mmHg were extrapolated. All brands were colorless and devoid of particulate contamination. Assay, pH, and viscosity values were within the compendia specification (BP and USP) for eye drops. The sterility assay showed no evidence of bacterial or fungi growth. All brands had actual filled volume less than or equal to the stated label claim. Their drops per 5 mL bottle range from 141-169 and 122-139 when dispensed in vertical and horizontal positions respectively; while for brands with 10 mL label volume, they range from 305-321 and 299-309 drops per bottle for vertical and horizontal dispensing respectively. Brand T1 (which is the most expensive) would need two bottles less in a year if the medication were to be dispensed vertically, amounting to N 3,200.00 ($ 7.04) reduction in treatment cost and a 45 % improvement in cost-effectiveness per intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction per year. In conclusion, the dispensing technique played a significant role in the number of drops per bottle, this would however impact on the treatment cost of glaucoma patient placed on timolol eye drop.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7592,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Phytomedicine and Clinical Therapeutics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Phytomedicine and Clinical Therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4314/jopat.v22i1.5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Phytomedicine and Clinical Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/jopat.v22i1.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

首先,本研究旨在确定在阿布贾及其周边地区流通的通用噻莫洛尔滴眼液是否真的可以互换。其次,基于点胶位置,探讨其在奈拉的成本效益。使用官方指南,我们评估了7种通用的替马洛尔眼科制剂的感官、pH值、粘度、无菌性和化验。在此之后,他们在垂直(90⁰)和水平(30⁰)位置测试瓶子中的填充体积,每个瓶子的总滴数,每毫升滴数;最终推断出每年所需的总瓶数、每年的成本和每毫米汞柱的成本效益。所有品牌都是无色的,没有颗粒污染。测定值、pH值和黏度值均符合眼药水的药典规范(BP和USP)。无菌试验显示没有细菌或真菌生长的证据。所有品牌的实际填充量都小于或等于所述标签声明。他们的滴每5毫升瓶范围从141-169和122-139分别在垂直和水平位置分配;而对于10毫升标签容量的品牌,它们的范围从305-321和299-309滴每瓶分别用于垂直和水平分配。如果垂直分配药物,T1品牌(最昂贵的)每年将减少两瓶,相当于减少3,200.00奈拉(7.04美元)的治疗成本,每年每眼内压(IOP)降低成本效益提高45%。综上所述,配药技术对每瓶滴数有显著影响,但会影响青光眼患者使用噻洛尔滴眼液的治疗成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Objective assessment of the variation in number of doses of generic timolol eye drops along with their cost effectiveness.
First, this study aims to ascertain if truly the generic timolol eye drops circulating in Abuja and it environ are interchangeable. Secondly, we explore their cost effectiveness in naira based on the dispensing position. Using official guidelines, we assessed seven generic timolol ophthalmic preparations for organoleptic, pH, viscosity, sterility, and assay test. After this, they were tested in the vertical (90 ⁰) and horizontal (30 ⁰) positions for filled volume in a bottle, the total number of drops per bottle, drops per mL; and eventually the total number of bottles needed per year, cost per year and their cost effectiveness per mmHg were extrapolated. All brands were colorless and devoid of particulate contamination. Assay, pH, and viscosity values were within the compendia specification (BP and USP) for eye drops. The sterility assay showed no evidence of bacterial or fungi growth. All brands had actual filled volume less than or equal to the stated label claim. Their drops per 5 mL bottle range from 141-169 and 122-139 when dispensed in vertical and horizontal positions respectively; while for brands with 10 mL label volume, they range from 305-321 and 299-309 drops per bottle for vertical and horizontal dispensing respectively. Brand T1 (which is the most expensive) would need two bottles less in a year if the medication were to be dispensed vertically, amounting to N 3,200.00 ($ 7.04) reduction in treatment cost and a 45 % improvement in cost-effectiveness per intraocular pressure (IOP) reduction per year. In conclusion, the dispensing technique played a significant role in the number of drops per bottle, this would however impact on the treatment cost of glaucoma patient placed on timolol eye drop.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信