A study of adherence of drug promotional literatures from various clinical specialties to the World Health Organization ethical criteria for drug promotion

Siri Hoovinahole, Ashwin Kamath

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: Doctors-prescribing practices are influenced by drug promotional activities. Studies have shown that drug promotional literatures (DPLs) do not conform to the established regulations in many countries. However, whether the non-conformance is more likely in a particular clinical specialty needs to be determined. The objective of our study was to assess the adherence of DPLs sampled from various clinical specialties to the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for ethical drug promotion and determine the presence of any difference. Methodology: Thirty DPLs were collected from each of the five clinical specialty clinics (General Medicine, Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pediatrics and Psychiatry) of a University Teaching Hospital. Each promotional literature was evaluated for adherence to the individual WHO ethical criteria's for drug promotion. Results: More than 80% of the promotional literatures from all the clinical specialties did not contain information on dosage modification, contraindications, precautions, adverse effects, drug interactions, drug over dosage, excipients, storage and shelf-life, and legal category of the drugs. Nearly 19.33% of the DPL were for vitamins, minerals, and nutritional supplements; 13.33% for antimicrobials and 10% for anti-anxiety medications. Conclusions: Our study shows that most of the DPLs across clinical specialties failed to adhere to many of the WHO criteria of ethical drug promotion. The information lacking in the DPLs is critical for rational decision making. Considering that these irregularities are present across clinical specialties, it is important to strengthen the regulations governing drug promotion.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)37-41
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Pharmaceutical Negative Results
Volume7
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-01-2016

Fingerprint

Pharmaceutical Preparations
Excipients
Drug and Narcotic Control
Gynecology
Drug Interactions
Vitamins
Teaching Hospitals
Obstetrics
Minerals
Psychiatry
Decision Making
Anxiety
Medicine
Pediatrics

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Pharmacology
  • Pharmaceutical Science
  • Drug Discovery

Cite this

@article{ccafb0a7a85046d4995cfcad9c536cff,
title = "A study of adherence of drug promotional literatures from various clinical specialties to the World Health Organization ethical criteria for drug promotion",
abstract = "Introduction: Doctors-prescribing practices are influenced by drug promotional activities. Studies have shown that drug promotional literatures (DPLs) do not conform to the established regulations in many countries. However, whether the non-conformance is more likely in a particular clinical specialty needs to be determined. The objective of our study was to assess the adherence of DPLs sampled from various clinical specialties to the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for ethical drug promotion and determine the presence of any difference. Methodology: Thirty DPLs were collected from each of the five clinical specialty clinics (General Medicine, Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pediatrics and Psychiatry) of a University Teaching Hospital. Each promotional literature was evaluated for adherence to the individual WHO ethical criteria's for drug promotion. Results: More than 80{\%} of the promotional literatures from all the clinical specialties did not contain information on dosage modification, contraindications, precautions, adverse effects, drug interactions, drug over dosage, excipients, storage and shelf-life, and legal category of the drugs. Nearly 19.33{\%} of the DPL were for vitamins, minerals, and nutritional supplements; 13.33{\%} for antimicrobials and 10{\%} for anti-anxiety medications. Conclusions: Our study shows that most of the DPLs across clinical specialties failed to adhere to many of the WHO criteria of ethical drug promotion. The information lacking in the DPLs is critical for rational decision making. Considering that these irregularities are present across clinical specialties, it is important to strengthen the regulations governing drug promotion.",
author = "Siri Hoovinahole and Ashwin Kamath",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.4103/0976-9234.177063",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
pages = "37--41",
journal = "Journal of Pharmaceutical Negative Results",
issn = "0976-9234",
publisher = "Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A study of adherence of drug promotional literatures from various clinical specialties to the World Health Organization ethical criteria for drug promotion

AU - Hoovinahole, Siri

AU - Kamath, Ashwin

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - Introduction: Doctors-prescribing practices are influenced by drug promotional activities. Studies have shown that drug promotional literatures (DPLs) do not conform to the established regulations in many countries. However, whether the non-conformance is more likely in a particular clinical specialty needs to be determined. The objective of our study was to assess the adherence of DPLs sampled from various clinical specialties to the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for ethical drug promotion and determine the presence of any difference. Methodology: Thirty DPLs were collected from each of the five clinical specialty clinics (General Medicine, Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pediatrics and Psychiatry) of a University Teaching Hospital. Each promotional literature was evaluated for adherence to the individual WHO ethical criteria's for drug promotion. Results: More than 80% of the promotional literatures from all the clinical specialties did not contain information on dosage modification, contraindications, precautions, adverse effects, drug interactions, drug over dosage, excipients, storage and shelf-life, and legal category of the drugs. Nearly 19.33% of the DPL were for vitamins, minerals, and nutritional supplements; 13.33% for antimicrobials and 10% for anti-anxiety medications. Conclusions: Our study shows that most of the DPLs across clinical specialties failed to adhere to many of the WHO criteria of ethical drug promotion. The information lacking in the DPLs is critical for rational decision making. Considering that these irregularities are present across clinical specialties, it is important to strengthen the regulations governing drug promotion.

AB - Introduction: Doctors-prescribing practices are influenced by drug promotional activities. Studies have shown that drug promotional literatures (DPLs) do not conform to the established regulations in many countries. However, whether the non-conformance is more likely in a particular clinical specialty needs to be determined. The objective of our study was to assess the adherence of DPLs sampled from various clinical specialties to the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for ethical drug promotion and determine the presence of any difference. Methodology: Thirty DPLs were collected from each of the five clinical specialty clinics (General Medicine, Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pediatrics and Psychiatry) of a University Teaching Hospital. Each promotional literature was evaluated for adherence to the individual WHO ethical criteria's for drug promotion. Results: More than 80% of the promotional literatures from all the clinical specialties did not contain information on dosage modification, contraindications, precautions, adverse effects, drug interactions, drug over dosage, excipients, storage and shelf-life, and legal category of the drugs. Nearly 19.33% of the DPL were for vitamins, minerals, and nutritional supplements; 13.33% for antimicrobials and 10% for anti-anxiety medications. Conclusions: Our study shows that most of the DPLs across clinical specialties failed to adhere to many of the WHO criteria of ethical drug promotion. The information lacking in the DPLs is critical for rational decision making. Considering that these irregularities are present across clinical specialties, it is important to strengthen the regulations governing drug promotion.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84960083951&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84960083951&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4103/0976-9234.177063

DO - 10.4103/0976-9234.177063

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84960083951

VL - 7

SP - 37

EP - 41

JO - Journal of Pharmaceutical Negative Results

JF - Journal of Pharmaceutical Negative Results

SN - 0976-9234

IS - 1

ER -