Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27446591›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2017

Assessment of current prescribing practices using World Health Organization core drug use and complementary indicators in selected rural community pharmacies in Southern India.

Anandhasayanam Aravamuthan, Mohanavalli Arputhavanan, Kannan Subramaniam, Sam Johnson Udaya Chander J

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Indicadores do uso de medicamentos na atenção primária de saúde: uma revisão sistemática.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2017
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Anandhasayanam AravamuthanDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, JKKMMRFs AJKK SA College of Pharmacy, Vattamalai, Ethirmedu, B Komarapalayam, Namakkal District, 638183 Tamilnadu India.
Mohanavalli ArputhavananDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, JKKMMRFs AJKK SA College of Pharmacy, Vattamalai, Ethirmedu, B Komarapalayam, Namakkal District, 638183 Tamilnadu India.
Kannan SubramaniamDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, JKKMMRFs AJKK SA College of Pharmacy, Vattamalai, Ethirmedu, B Komarapalayam, Namakkal District, 638183 Tamilnadu India.
Sam Johnson Udaya Chander JDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, RVS College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Coimbatore, 641402 Tamilnadu India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDue to the lack of clear, comprehensive, and rational drug policy, the production of pharmaceutical preparations in India is distorted for the most part. Indian markets are flooded with more than 70,000 formulations, compared to approximately 350 formulations listed in the World Health Organization (WHO) Essential Drug List. Studies have indicated that majority of prescriptions in India are of drugs of "doubtful efficacy." To promote rational drug use in developing countries, assessment of drug use patterns with the WHO drug use indicators is becoming increasingly necessary. The aim of this study was to assess the patterns of drug use by using WHO core drug use and complementary indicators.

methodsOne thousand fifty-two patients were prospectively interviewed and their prescriptions analyzed according to WHO guideline five randomly selected busy community pharmacies in northern district of the State of Tamil Nadu, South India to analyze the WHO core drug use and complementary indicators using an investigator-administered data collection form. The main outcome measured is patterns of drug use measured using WHO core drug use and complementary indicators.

resultsThe data obtained showed that, out of total drugs prescribed (3936), only 2.5 % (100) drugs were prescribed by generic name. Mean number of drugs per encounter was 3.7. Use of antibiotics was 22 %, percentage of encounters with an injection was 7.2 %, and the percentage of drugs prescribed from formulary was 99.8 %.

conclusionsBrand name prescribing is dominated even in rural India. There is a need to improve the availability of essential guidelines and key drugs in the stock in rural areas of India. Prescriptions studied were conforming to most indicators of WHO except the number of drugs prescribed & generic name prescription practice, which deviated. In India the healthcare is dominated by private practitioners at the primary level. Prescription practices of the individual community-based clinician needs consistent monitoring with respect to generic name prescribing habits as well as the number of drugs prescribed. The WHO drug use indicator guidelines need to be promoted amidst the primary care clinicians and should not be just limited to hospitals having a formulary. The data collected by this study can be used by policymakers to monitor and improve the prescribing and consumption of pharmaceutical products in Southern India.

Indexed as

Health facility indicatorsIndiaPatient care indicatorsPrescribing indicatorsWHO guideline

Identifiers

PMID27446591
PMCPMC4955117

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.