Premium
Consumption of three most widely used analgesics in six European countries
Author(s) -
Hudec R.,
Božeková L.,
Tisoňová J.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.622
H-Index - 73
eISSN - 1365-2710
pISSN - 0269-4727
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2710.2011.01256.x
Subject(s) - consumption (sociology) , czech , slovak , medicine , defined daily dose , european union , acetaminophen , environmental health , analgesic , aspirin , drug , business , pharmacology , economic policy , social science , linguistics , philosophy , sociology
Summary What is known and Objective: Analgesics are among the most widely used drugs and there is wide intercountry variability in the rates of consumption of different analgesics. Our objective is to determine and compare patterns of analgesic consumption in the Slovak Republic and a number of other European countries. Methods: We undertook a drug utilization study using WHO ATC/defined daily doses (DDD) methodology. Wholesale analgesic data collected by the Slovak State Institute for Drug Control were used. Utilization was calculated as DDD per 1000 inhabitants per day. Comparison with wholesale data from Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Norway and Denmark, published on the Internet, was made. Results and Discussion: Paracetamol/acetaminophen consumption varied only a little in Slovak Republic and Czech Republic, whereas consumption in Nordic countries was significantly higher ( P < 0.05) and in Estonia significantly lower. Ibuprofen consumption was significantly higher in Czech Republic and Finland. Significantly lower consumption was in Norway. The lowest consumption of ASA/aspirin was in Denmark and in Norway. The highest consumption was in Finland. What is new and Conclusion: Effective therapy needs good prescribing and well‐informed prescribers and patients. Our study highlights wide differences in analgesic consumption even among similar European countries. The basis of these differences and their potential clinical impact require further investigation.