Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Generic Alternatives In General Practice

Robert J. Anderson and Philip M. Reilly
British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Edition)
Vol. 288, No. 6424 (Apr. 14, 1984), p. 1127/1130, 1131/1134
Published by: BMJ
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/29514773
Page Count: 2
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Preview not available

Abstract

Using a standard analysis of one month's prescribing in a general practice we showed a potential saving of 8.8% (£883.22) of the net cost of ingredients through substituting exact generic alternatives. Our results confirm the possible reduction in cost of drugs to the National Health Service by the use of generic substitution as suggested in the Greenfield report. Although substitution was theoretically available in most therapeutic classes, two thirds of the potential savings pertained to two classes, preparations acting on the nervous system and preparations acting on the cardiovascular system and diuretics. Of the prescriptions (31%) with potential generic alternatives, less than three quarters were actually available.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
[1127/1130]
    [1127/1130]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
[1131/1134]
    [1131/1134]