Summary
Objectives
To assess the consumption levels of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in Italy, in comparison with some foreign markets. To investigate the practice in PPI prescribing in Italy, in comparison with consumption standards.
Design
The DDD (Defined Daily Dose) tool was adopted as the best unit of measure to be used in fulfilling the first objective. With regard to the second objective, in order to estimate the PDDs (Prescribed Daily Doses) in the PPI area, a large sample (8940 prescription episodes) was drawn from the Health Search database, a facility created by Società Italiana di Medicina Generale and supported by a number of pharmaceutical companies.
Results
The Italian PPI market size was 198.2 million DDDs in 2000 (more than twice the 1995 data), corresponding to 9.4 DDDs per 1000 people per day (that is, about 1% of the Italian population is treated every day with PPIs). In the same year, PPI consumption was 16.5 DDDs per 1000 people per day in France and 19.3 in the UK. In Italy, the ratio between PPI and H2-antagonists consumption (1.6) was lowest, as compared with France (4.5) and with UK (1.8).
With regard to omeprazole, the prescription practice (weighted average PDD: 25.4 mg) was higher than its standard (DDD: 20 mg); similar results were found for pantoprazole (46 vs 40 mg) and rabeprazole (22.2 vs 20 mg). On the contrary, lansoprazole’s PDD (23.4 mg) was lower than its DDD (30 mg); however, the average length of therapy with lansoprazole turned out to be longer.
Conclusions
The PPI market is expanding in Italy, although to a lesser extent and with more competition from H2-antagonists as compared with France and the UK.
When evaluating prescription practices and their costs, the DDD tool has clear limitations, while PDD is a better measure. However, not only PDD amounts but also lengths of therapies should be taken into consideration in order to formulate sound judgements about treatment costs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Bibliografia
Ministero della Salute. L’uso dei farmaci in Italia. Rapporto nazionale, primo quadrimestre 2002. Roma, luglio 2002
Vaccheri A, Montanaro N. Il metodo della Dose Definita Giornaliera (DDD) per valutare il consumo dei farmaci. Farmeconomia1995; 2: 16–22
Clark KW, Gray D. The Defined Daily Dose as a tool in Pharmacoeconomics. Advantages and limitations. PharmacoEconomics 1995; 7: 280–3
Lucioni C, Mazzi S. Indicatori per il consumo dei farmaci: ruolo delle DDD e delle PDD. PharmacoEconomics in infectious diseases. 1–10, settembre 1996
WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology. Guidelines for ATC classification and DDD assignement. Oslo: World Health Organization, 2000
DURG-Italia. Archivio delle DDD dei farmaci in commercio in Italia. Bologna, settembre 2002
Uso dei farmaci: nuovi strumenti di ricerca. III: Lista di alcune dosi giornaliere definite (DDD). Quaderni di Sanità Pubblica 1984; 32/33: 207–17
Castellani L, Bozzini L, Pedrini A. Prima lista italiana delle DDD di alcuni gruppi di farmaci. Giornale Italiano di Farmacia Clinica 1989; 3: 89–116
Caffari B, Di Giovanbattista G, Cattaruzzi C. La lista delle DDD del DURG-Italia. Giornale di Farmacia Clinica 1995; 9: 91–137
Lecomte T, Paris V. Consommation de pharmacie en Europe, 1992. Parigi: CREDES, 1994
Larsen J, Vaccheri A, Andersen M, et al. Lack of adherence to lipid-lowering drug treatment. A comparison of utilisation patterns in defined populations in Funen, Denmark and Bologna, Italy. Br J Pharmacol 2000; 49: 463–71
Benner JS, Glynn RJ, Mogun H. Long-term persistence in use of statin therapy in elderly patients. JAMA 2002; 288: 455–61
Jackevicius CA, Mamdani M, Tu JV. Adherence with statin therapy in elderly patients with and without acute coronary syndromes. JAMA 2002; 288: 462–7
Del Favero A. La DDD: perché e a chi risulta utile tale strumento?Farmeconomia 1995: 2: 23–23
Pedrini A, Carrara F, Guglielmo L. Defined Daily Doses (DDD): significato, limiti ed applicazioni. Giornale Italiano di Farmacia Clinica 1988; 2: 153–7
Scroccaro G, Martini P, Martini N e Gruppo SIFO per la farmacologia ospedaliera. Confronto fra dosi definite/die (DDD) e dosi prescritte/die (PDD) di alcuni antibiotici in diciotto ospedali italiani. Giornale Italiano di Farmacia Clinica 1991; 5: 59–61
Lucioni C, Mazzi S, Negrini C. Le conseguenze sulla spesa farmaceutica pubblica di un nuovo inibitore di pompa protonica: esomeprazolo. Farmacoeconomia e percorsi terapeutici 2002; 3(1): 5–14
Salvato C, Terrazzani G, Serraglia D, et al. Le patologie gastrointestinali dall’epidemiologia all’intervento terapeutico nella pratica di medicina generale: analisi dei costi sanitari indotti. PharmacoEconomics — Italian Research Articles 2002: 4: 3–14
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
I peer reviewers, per questo articolo, sono stati coordinati da Ermanno Attanasio.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lucioni, C., Mazzi, S. Realtà prescrittiva versus standard di consumo nel campo degli inibitori della pompa protonica in Italia. Pharmacoeconomics-Ital-Res-Articles 5, 3–10 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03320599
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03320599