The use of generic immunosuppression for transplant patients: a UK perspective

Improving specialist drug prescribing in primary care using task and error analysis: an observational study

BACKGROUND

Electronic prescribing has benefited from computerised clinical decision support systems (CDSSs); however, no published studies have evaluated the potential for a CDSS to support GPs in prescribing specialist drugs.

AIM

To identify potential weaknesses and errors in the existing process of prescribing specialist drugs that could be addressed in the development of a CDSS.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Semi-structured interviews with key informants followed by an observational study involving GPs in the UK.

METHOD

Twelve key informants were interviewed to investigate the use of CDSSs in the UK. Nine GPs were observed while performing case scenarios depicting requests from hospitals or patients to prescribe a specialist drug. Activity diagrams, hierarchical task analysis, and systematic human error reduction and prediction approach analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The current process of prescribing specialist drugs by GPs is prone to error. Errors of omission due to lack of information were the most common errors, which could potentially result in a GP prescribing a specialist drug that should only be prescribed in hospitals, or prescribing a specialist drug without reference to a shared care protocol. Half of all possible errors in the prescribing process had a high probability of occurrence.

CONCLUSION

A CDSS supporting GPs during the process of prescribing specialist drugs is needed. This could, first, support the decision making of whether or not to undertake prescribing, and, second, provide drug-specific parameters linked to shared care protocols, which could reduce the errors identified and increase patient safety.

Is it ethical to prescribe generic immunosuppressive drugs to renal transplant patients?

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

This review was conducted to determine the ethical acceptability of prescribing generic immunosuppressive drugs to renal transplant patients.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

The literature search was conducted using Pubmed and Google Scholar.

FINDINGS

The use of generic immunosuppressive drugs (ISDs) in transplantation is a controversial topic. There is a consensus among transplant societies that clinical data is lacking and that caution should be exercised. The reluctance to use generic ISDs in organ transplantation is partly related to the fact that most are "critical dose drugs", and that either low dosing or overdosing could have serious adverse consequences for both patients and society (i.e., the loss of scarce organs). In this paper, we examine the various ethical issues involved such as distributive justice, physician duties, risks versus benefits, conflict of interest, informed consent, and logistical and economic issues.

LIMITATIONS

Our analysis was limited by the paucity of clinical data on generic ISDs and the absence of health economics studies to quantify the benefits of prescribing generic ISDs.

IMPLICATIONS

Our study led us to conclude that it would be ethical to prescribe generic ISDs provided certain conditions were met. These include regulatory safeguards to minimize the risks of substitution; education of patients; and further clinical and health economics studies to better inform clinicians, patients and society of the risks and costs related to drug substitution.