PENGARUH HARGA, BRAND IMAGE DAN KUALITAS PRODUK TERHADAP KEPUTUSAN PEMBELIAN PRODUK OBAT BERMEREK PADA PT. BERNOFARM

This study aims to examine how the Price, Brand Image and quality influence on purchasing decisions for branded drug products. This research was conducted at PT. Bernofarm Tbk Padang. The data used in this study came from the answer scores obtained for distributed questionnaires. The testing methods used in this study are normality test, multicollinearity test, heterokesidity test, multiple regression analysis, then use the statistical F test, the t statistic test and the coefficient of determination test (R2) with a significance level of 5%. The results of this study indicate that the price has a significant effect on purchasing decisions for branded drug products, Brand Image has a positive but not significant effect on purchasing decisions for branded drug products while the quality of the products has a positive but not significant effect on purchasing decisions for branded drug products.

Comparison of Success Management Effect of Therapy Use of Generic Drugs and Branded Drugs in Typhoid Fever Patients in Installation of Inpatients

AIM: This research aim to know the comparison of efficacy of the effect therapy uses generic ciprofloxacin and branded drug tequinol from patient of typhoid fever. METHODS: The research method has the character of the descriptive observational with the technique intake of sample is consecutive sampling/quota sampling. Subject research was conducted on 67 sample fulfilling criterion of inclusion and exclusion diagnosed by typhoid fever at period January–March 2018. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients use the generic ciprofloxacin and 33 patients use the brand tequinol. Time of fever degradation for patient using brand tequinol range from 1 to 3 day and for patient using generic ciprofloxacin 3–7 day. CONCLUSION: After tested to use the Mann–Whitney test, there is difference having a meaning of hospitalization of to lodge briefer and free from fever quicker at brand tequinol than generic ciprofloxacin at patient of typhoid fever in RSUD Haji Makassar (p < 0.05).

Pharmacogenetic perspectives in improving pharmacokinetic profiles for efficient bioequivalence trials with highly variable drugs: a review

Conducting bioequivalence trials under traditional crossover study designs without exposing a large number of healthy volunteers to demonstrate two highly variable (%coefficient of variability greater than 30) test/reference (branded) drug products in different formulations to meet the standard 90% confidence interval criteria of relevant pharmacokinetic metrics between 0.80 and 1.25 and to maintain the consumer risk smaller than 5% has been a challenging task. Genetic polymorphisms encoding key drug-metabolizing enzymes can significantly influence absorption, distribution, metabolism and elimination of many highly variable generic drugs after administration. This article briefly reviews the case studies and examples of utilizing pharmacogenetic screening approaches in the recent literature to alleviate the resources and ethical burden of recruiting larger numbers of subjects in bioequivalence trials needed to perform pharmacokinetic studies for formulations of highly variable drug products without widening the bioequivalence acceptance limits.

First FDA Approved 3D Printed Drug Paved New Path for Increased Precision in Patient Care

The pharmaceutical industry is developed every year with the aim of public health, safety, and financial growth. Keeping public safety in mind, the industry is mostly concentrated on novel plans in the drug development process and plans on how to increase the curing rate of a disorder and building up the accuracy in patient care. The increase in the number of diseases has led to the generic and branded drug competition by which the pressure on the market has increased. The pharmaceutical manufacturers are attempting to find the needs of patients in different ways. The industries were manufacturing the drugs in unique ways which help to increase their productivity and also to increase the patient experience. Due to this, all pharmaceutical manufacturers are trying to manufacture drugs using 3D printing. In 2015, the industries succeeded by manufacturing the drug Spritam using 3D printing and it was the first prescribed drug manufactured by using 3D printing (3DP). 3DP is the process of depositing powder in a layer upon layer that was opposite to subtractive manufacturing and it is perfect for pharmaceuticals because it provides enhanced accuracy in the development and formulation of dosage forms. The 3DP has different advantages to companies and patients like an increase in dissolution rate, absorption, adherence, efficacy, and long life of branded drugs along with the decrease in pill burden. This process leads to a break in the manufacturing method of drugs but helps to overcome several problems and also helps in better patient outcomes in the solid dose markets.

US oncologists' perception of the efficacy, safety, and willingness to prescribe biosimilar cancer therapies.

e15213 Background: Biosimilars are the fastest-growing class of therapeutic products in the United States and can offer treatment options that can potentially lower healthcare-related costs in cancer care. It is essential to know if an oncologist will use such products. Therefore, we assessed the expected biosimilar prescribing behaviors of practicing oncologists for the originator products Avastin, Herceptin, Rituxan and Neulasta. Methods: We conducted an online cross-sectional survey of 75 hospital affiliated (46.7%) and community-based (53.3%) oncologists in July 2019 and used a Likert scale rating of “Never,” “Seldom,” “Sometimes,” “Often” and Always.” Descriptive statistics and percentages are reported; the Chi-square test was used for between-group comparisons. Results: The majority of oncologists (62.7%) worked in a for-profit practice, with 38.7% of primary practices offering exclusive in-office dispensing. Physicians currently reported prescribing branded drugs often or always 76% of the time. When asked to rate biosimilars by quality, safety and effectiveness, over 70% of providers perceived these four biosimilars to be the same or near equivalent to the branded drug. When asked to report their expected likelihood of prescribing a biosimilar in the future, 60% of providers believed they would often or always prescribe a biosimilar. There was no difference in the providers’ current biosimilar prescription pattern by type of insurance plan. Provided financial equivalence, oncologists reported being more likely to prescribe a biosimilar to new patients (85.3%) compared to existing patients (69.3%) (p = 0.019). The top 3 drivers of using biosimilar cancer therapies are the patient’s out of pocket cost, value of reimbursement and cost to the practice; 61%, 51% and 52%, respectively for fee-for-service reimbursement and 69%, 44% and 61%, respectively for value-based reimbursement. When asked why providers would not switch from buy-and bill to white-bagging, control of the drug (41.3%) and financial benefit to the providers’ practice (40%) were the top 2 reasons. Conclusions: Biosimilars are expected to reduce drug expenditures in cancer care. While providers in this study found biosimilars to be safe and effective, they reported being less likely to prescribe these drugs when there is a potential for their practice to lose money and control of the drug. Payment models for biosimilars in cancer care must support practice economics.

Comparative Approaches to Drug Pricing

The United States relies primarily on market forces to determine prices for drugs, whereas most other industrialized countries use a variety of approaches to determine drug prices. Branded drug companies have patents and market exclusivity periods in most industrialized countries. During this period, pharmaceutical companies are allowed to set their list price as high as they prefer in the United States owing to the absence of government price control mechanisms that exist in other countries. Insured patients often pay a percentage of the list price, and cost sharing creates some pressure to lower the list price. Pharmacy benefit managers negotiate with drug companies for lower prices by offering the drug company favorable formulary placement and fewer utilization controls. However, these approaches appear to be less effective, compared with other countries’ approaches to containing branded drug prices, because prices are substantially higher in the United States. Other industrialized countries employ various forms of rate setting and price regulation, such as external reference pricing, therapeutic valuation, and health technology assessment to determine the appropriate price.

The Role of Risk Aversion in Reverse Payment Agreements

Both the courts and the economists have identified risk aversion as a justification for reverse payment agreements, especially the risk aversion of brand-name companies. However, existing economic researches show whether risk aversion can be a rationale for reverse payment agreements depends on the type of reverse payment agreements reached. In “complete” settlement agreement where a brand-name drug manufacturer provides consideration to a generic drug company to completely settle the patent litigation, with agreed-upon entry dates for the generic, risk aversion does not provide a justification for reverse payment, but asymmetry in risk aversion can be a rationale for reverse payment. In “partial” settlement agreement where a branded drug manufacturer provides consideration to a generic drug company in exchange for the generic to agree not to enter the market while they continue the patent litigation, it is not the risk aversion of the brand company, but the risk aversion of the generic company that can facilitate the parties to reach a partial settlement agreement with reverse payment that serves the procompetitive purpose.

Knowledge and perception about generic drugs in patients coming to OPD of tertiary care centre

Background: In an era of rapidly rising health care costs generic medicines provide a less expensive alternative to branded medicines. In addition to reducing the overall health care expenditure, it has been shown to improve adherence. Objective was to study knowledge and perception about generic drugs among patients coming to outpatient department of tertiary care centre.Methods: After ethical approval a cross sectional questionnaire based study was conducted. Patients (n=71) were interviewed according to questionnaire in vernacular language by investigator to fill questionnaire.Results: About 28% people think that price of generic drug is less than a branded drug while nearly 61% of people don’t know of it. Only 18.85% participants had taken generic medicine. Trusting efficacy of generic drugs only 30 participants were in favour it. Even they have not seen or heard publicity of generic drugs (61.97%). They (60.56%) opined that generic drugs never prescribe in our country.Conclusions: Limitation in knowledge and perception about generic medicines has been seen among participants.