↓ Skip to main content

The changing patterns of dispensing branded and generic drugs for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease between 2006 and 2011 in Japan: a retrospective cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
The changing patterns of dispensing branded and generic drugs for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease between 2006 and 2011 in Japan: a retrospective cohort study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-0734-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kyoko Murata, Shiro Hinotsu, Shota Hamada, Yasumasa Ezoe, Manabu Muto, Koji Kawakami

Abstract

Despite rising healthcare costs, generic drugs are less frequently dispensed in Japan compared with other developed countries. This study aimed to describe changes in dispensing of branded and generic drugs and to explore possible factors that promote the use of generic drugs. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using a Japanese medical and pharmacy claims database. All proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) with indications for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) described on Japanese labels were included. Patterns of dispensing branded and generic drugs for the treatment of GERD between 2006 and 2011 were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression was applied to investigate factors associated with receiving generic drugs. The study cohort included 14,590 patients (male: 50.2%, mean age: 43.1 years). Branded drugs for GERD were still frequently dispensed despite an increase in the share of generic drugs. Only 4.3% of patients who initially received branded drugs switched to generic drugs. The percentage of patients who received only generic drugs increased over time (6.5% to 22.1%). The frequency of generic drug dispensing was the highest in the setting where both prescription and dispensing were implemented in clinics (43.3%), while the lowest in the setting where both prescription and dispensing were implemented in hospitals (11.5%). Factors associated with receiving generic drugs included year of dispensing (adjusted OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.94 to 2.55 for 2009-11 v 2006-8), prescription and dispensing setting (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.26 for prescription in hospitals and dispensing in community pharmacies; OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.80 to 2.72 for prescription in clinics and dispensing in community pharmacies; and OR 4.55, 95% CI 3.68 to 5.62 for prescription and dispensing in clinics v prescription and dispensing in hospitals) and H2RAs (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.49 to 1.81 compared to PPIs). The share of generic drugs for the treatment of GERD increased over time although branded drugs for GERD were still dispensed frequently. The use of generic drugs for GERD was influenced not only by government policies but also by changes in treatment approach and the setting of prescription and dispensing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 26%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 13%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 5 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 35%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 19%
Arts and Humanities 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 7 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 March 2015.
All research outputs
#19,280,634
of 23,866,543 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#6,778
of 7,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,039
of 257,507 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#76
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,866,543 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,938 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 257,507 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.