Cargando…

The impact of non-medical switching among ambulatory patients: an updated systematic literature review

Background: Non-medical switching (NMS) is defined as switching to a clinically similar but chemically distinct medication for reasons apart from lack of effectiveness, tolerability or adherence. Objective: To update a prior systematic review evaluating the impact of NMS on outcomes. Data sources: A...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Weeda, Erin R., Nguyen, Elaine, Martin, Silas, Ingham, Michael, Sobieraj, Diana M., Bookhart, Brahim K., Coleman, Craig I.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Routledge 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6818107/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31692904
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20016689.2019.1678563
_version_ 1783463558255738880
author Weeda, Erin R.
Nguyen, Elaine
Martin, Silas
Ingham, Michael
Sobieraj, Diana M.
Bookhart, Brahim K.
Coleman, Craig I.
author_facet Weeda, Erin R.
Nguyen, Elaine
Martin, Silas
Ingham, Michael
Sobieraj, Diana M.
Bookhart, Brahim K.
Coleman, Craig I.
author_sort Weeda, Erin R.
collection PubMed
description Background: Non-medical switching (NMS) is defined as switching to a clinically similar but chemically distinct medication for reasons apart from lack of effectiveness, tolerability or adherence. Objective: To update a prior systematic review evaluating the impact of NMS on outcomes. Data sources: An updated search through 10/1/2018 in Medline and Web of Science was performed. Study selection: We included studies evaluating ≥25 patients and measuring the impact of NMS of drugs on ≥1 endpoint. Data extraction: The direction of association between NMS and endpoints was classified as negative, positive or neutral. Data synthesis: Thirty-eight studies contributed 154 endpoints. The direction of association was negative (n = 48; 31.2%) or neutral (n = 91; 59.1%) more often than it was positive (n = 15; 9.7%). Stratified by endpoint type, NMS was associated with a negative impact on clinical, economic, health-care utilization and medication-taking behavior in 26.9%,41.7%,30.3% and 75.0% of cases; with a positive effect seen in 3.0% (resource utilization) to 14.0% (clinical) of endpoints. Of the 92 endpoints from studies performed by the entity dictating the NMS, 88.0%were neutral or positive; whereas, only 40.3%of endpoints from studies conducted separately from the interested entity were neutral or positive. Conclusions: NMS was commonly associated with negative or neutral endpoints and was seldom associated with positive ones.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6818107
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Routledge
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68181072019-11-05 The impact of non-medical switching among ambulatory patients: an updated systematic literature review Weeda, Erin R. Nguyen, Elaine Martin, Silas Ingham, Michael Sobieraj, Diana M. Bookhart, Brahim K. Coleman, Craig I. J Mark Access Health Policy Original Research Article Background: Non-medical switching (NMS) is defined as switching to a clinically similar but chemically distinct medication for reasons apart from lack of effectiveness, tolerability or adherence. Objective: To update a prior systematic review evaluating the impact of NMS on outcomes. Data sources: An updated search through 10/1/2018 in Medline and Web of Science was performed. Study selection: We included studies evaluating ≥25 patients and measuring the impact of NMS of drugs on ≥1 endpoint. Data extraction: The direction of association between NMS and endpoints was classified as negative, positive or neutral. Data synthesis: Thirty-eight studies contributed 154 endpoints. The direction of association was negative (n = 48; 31.2%) or neutral (n = 91; 59.1%) more often than it was positive (n = 15; 9.7%). Stratified by endpoint type, NMS was associated with a negative impact on clinical, economic, health-care utilization and medication-taking behavior in 26.9%,41.7%,30.3% and 75.0% of cases; with a positive effect seen in 3.0% (resource utilization) to 14.0% (clinical) of endpoints. Of the 92 endpoints from studies performed by the entity dictating the NMS, 88.0%were neutral or positive; whereas, only 40.3%of endpoints from studies conducted separately from the interested entity were neutral or positive. Conclusions: NMS was commonly associated with negative or neutral endpoints and was seldom associated with positive ones. Routledge 2019-10-19 /pmc/articles/PMC6818107/ /pubmed/31692904 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20016689.2019.1678563 Text en © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Weeda, Erin R.
Nguyen, Elaine
Martin, Silas
Ingham, Michael
Sobieraj, Diana M.
Bookhart, Brahim K.
Coleman, Craig I.
The impact of non-medical switching among ambulatory patients: an updated systematic literature review
title The impact of non-medical switching among ambulatory patients: an updated systematic literature review
title_full The impact of non-medical switching among ambulatory patients: an updated systematic literature review
title_fullStr The impact of non-medical switching among ambulatory patients: an updated systematic literature review
title_full_unstemmed The impact of non-medical switching among ambulatory patients: an updated systematic literature review
title_short The impact of non-medical switching among ambulatory patients: an updated systematic literature review
title_sort impact of non-medical switching among ambulatory patients: an updated systematic literature review
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6818107/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31692904
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20016689.2019.1678563
work_keys_str_mv AT weedaerinr theimpactofnonmedicalswitchingamongambulatorypatientsanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT nguyenelaine theimpactofnonmedicalswitchingamongambulatorypatientsanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT martinsilas theimpactofnonmedicalswitchingamongambulatorypatientsanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT inghammichael theimpactofnonmedicalswitchingamongambulatorypatientsanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT sobierajdianam theimpactofnonmedicalswitchingamongambulatorypatientsanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT bookhartbrahimk theimpactofnonmedicalswitchingamongambulatorypatientsanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT colemancraigi theimpactofnonmedicalswitchingamongambulatorypatientsanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT weedaerinr impactofnonmedicalswitchingamongambulatorypatientsanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT nguyenelaine impactofnonmedicalswitchingamongambulatorypatientsanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT martinsilas impactofnonmedicalswitchingamongambulatorypatientsanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT inghammichael impactofnonmedicalswitchingamongambulatorypatientsanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT sobierajdianam impactofnonmedicalswitchingamongambulatorypatientsanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT bookhartbrahimk impactofnonmedicalswitchingamongambulatorypatientsanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview
AT colemancraigi impactofnonmedicalswitchingamongambulatorypatientsanupdatedsystematicliteraturereview