ArticlePharmacy practice
Swedish patients' trust in the bioequivalence of interchangeable generics. What factors are important for low trust?
Article in Pharmacy practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Is There Any Research Evidence Beyond Surveys and Opinion Polls on Automatic Substitution of Biological Medicines? A Systematic Review.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2021Pooled it
- Influence of sex and gender-related factors on the knowledge of generic medicines among older patients and caregivers.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Factors facilitating and hindering counselling about generic substitution and a reference price system in community pharmacies - a survey among Finnish dispensers.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Patients' beliefs and behaviours are associated with perceptions of safety and concerns in a hypothetical biosimilar switch.Rheumatology international · 2021Article
- Generic versus brand-name over-the-counter analgesics: knowledge and attitudes among Swedish pharmacy customers.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGeneric substitution (GS), is a cost-containment strategy meant to contain pharmaceutical expenditure without compromising health objectives. In order to shape GS into a policy that is both efficient and safe it is crucial to understand which factors are most important for patients' trust in GS.
objectiveTo assess Swedish patients' level of trust in the bioequivalence of cheap and expensive generic medicines, and the association between trust and various factors.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted. Questionnaires were handed out at 12 community pharmacies in Sweden, selected through stratified sampling, between March and April 2015. The questionnaire included seven socio-demographic questions in addition to 18 items divided into three sections: the 'views on generic medicine'-scale, information on and prior experiences of GS, financial aspects and change of color/name. Odds Ratios (ORs) were estimated applying adjusted logistic regression analyses with trust in the bioequivalence of generic medicines used as outcome variable and various factors as predictors.
resultsA total of 719 patients participated (response rate 85.7%). The results show that 70.7% of the respondents' trust that cheap and expensive interchangeable generic medicines are equal. Of the respondents 36.0% considered the change in appearance and 40.8% the change in names to complicate adherence. Lower trust in the bioequivalence of generic medicines were associated with being female (aOR=1.82, 95%CI 1.20:2.75, p<0.01), patients perceiving that changes in product name and appearance make adherence more complicated (aOR=2.18, 95%CI 1.48:3.19, p<0.001), disagreeing in that GS saves money for me (the customer) (aOR=2.68, 95%CI 1.58:4.55, p<0.001) or that GS saves money for society (aOR=3.21, 95%CI 1.46:7.08, p<0.01).
conclusionsSeven out of ten respondents had trust in the bioequivalence of generic medicines, and one in three considered GS to complicate adherence. Four factors were associated with lower trust in GS, i.e. female gender, agreeing that changes in product name and appearance complicates adherence, disagreeing in that GS saves money for me or disagreeing in that GS saves money for the society. Low trust in GS needs to be addressed, not least in the communication between health professionals and patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.