High formulary inclusion for rivaroxaban and ticagrelor

2012 ◽  
Vol 651 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-11
Keyword(s):  
Formulary Inclusion

Antibiotic Cost-Containment

1986 ◽  
Vol 20 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 589-591 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen D. Huckleberry
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Reactions ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Cost Savings ◽  
Economic Cost ◽  
Population Characteristics ◽  
Veterans Administration ◽  
Utilization Review ◽  
Therapy Costs ◽  
Antibiotic Cost ◽  
Formulary Inclusion

A multidisciplinary, professional, and administrative approach to selecting therapeutic agents for formulary inclusion—as it is practiced at the Tuskegee Veterans Administration Medical Center—is described. The process by which members of a Drug Utilization Review Subcommittee evaluate drugs is explained in detail. Numerous factors, such as patient population characteristics, total therapy costs, adverse reactions, indications, dosage, and efficacy are considered. Findings, decisions, and economic cost-savings, specifically with respect to antibiotics, are revealed.

The cost effectiveness and budget impact of natalizumab for formulary inclusion

2009 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin Bakhshai ◽  
Raymond Bleu-Lainé ◽  
Miah Jung ◽  
Jeanne Lim ◽  
Christian Reyes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Budget Impact ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Formulary Inclusion

Use of Biologic Therapeutics in Difficult-to-Treat Psoriasis

2009 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-17
Author(s):  
Charles Lynde
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Clinical Experience ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Severe Psoriasis ◽  
First Line ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Formulary Inclusion ◽  
Equal Efficacy

Background: A need for improved psoriasis management drove the development of four biologicals now approved for use in moderate to severe psoriasis: alefacept, efalizumab, etanercept, and infliximab. Objective: This review compares the recommended and practical use of biologicals in “difficult-to-treat” psoriasis. Difficult-to-treat patients, a subpopulation of particular interest to caregivers and regulators, are those for whom conventional options are unavailable, contraindicated, intolerable, or ineffective. Conclusions: Despite guidance recommending that biologicals be considered among first-line antipsoriasis treatments, formulary inclusion may be influenced by the biologicals' success in controlling difficult-to-treat psoriasis. Findings from the Clinical Experience Acquired with Raptiva (CLEAR) randomized controlled trial (RCT) established efalizumab's equal efficacy in difficult-to-treat and moderate to severe psoriasis. The CLEAR data were cited in support of a regulatory recommendation to include efalizumab in Canadian provincial formularies. For some other biologicals, evidence regarding efficacy in difficult-to-treat psoriasis remains equivocal. Additional RCTs are needed to define appropriate roles for specific biologicals in difficult-to-treat patients.

Antipsychotics: How Strict the Formulary?

1988 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 324-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce Alexander
Keyword(s):  
Dosage Form ◽  
Relative Efficacy ◽  
Patient Response ◽  
Antipsychotic Medications ◽  
Clinical Considerations ◽  
Individual Patient Response ◽  
Relative Differences ◽  
Level Monitoring ◽  
Formulary Inclusion ◽  
The U.S

Seventeen antipsychotic medications are available in the U.S. Antipsychotic formulary considerations include relative efficacy, individual patient response, relative differences in adverse effects, dosage form availability, blood level monitoring, and generic availability. Chlorpromazine, thioridazine, haloperidol, and fluphenazine are recommended for formulary inclusion based on research and clinical considerations. A recommendation for managing a patient receiving a nonformulary antipsychotic is presented.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document