Medication-related costs of rhinitis in australia: A nostradata cross-sectional study of pharmacy purchases

Pete Smith, David Price, Richard Harvey, Andrew Carney, Vicky Kritikos, Sinthis Bosnic-Anticevich, Louise Christian, Derek Skinner, Victoria Carter, Alice Durieux

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    7 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Purpose: There is a relative paucity of research regarding medication expenditure associated with multiple-therapy use for rhinitis in Australia. To describe 1) the nature and extent of multiple-therapy use for rhinitis in Australia using data on therapies purchased with prescription or over-the-counter (OTC) and 2) additional costs incurred by multiple-therapy use compared with intranasal corticosteroid (INCS) therapy alone. Patients and methods: A retrospective observational study was carried out using a database containing anonymous pharmacy transaction data available from 20% of pharmacies in Australia that links doctor prescriptions and OTC purchase information. Pharmacy purchases of at least one prescription or OTC rhinitis treatment, with or without additional asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) therapy, by patients during 2013 and 2014 were assessed. Results: In total, 4,247,193 prescription and OTC rhinitis treatments were purchased from 909 pharmacies over 24 months. The majority of rhinitis therapy transactions were single-therapy purchases without additional asthma/COPD therapy. Of the single therapies purchased, 73% were oral antihistamines (OAHs) and 15% were INCS therapy. Dual-therapy purchases of INCSs and OAHs accounted for 40% of multiple-therapy purchases. Patients frequently purchased OAHs, nonsteroidal nasal sprays, and eye drops for allergic conjunctivitis alongside INCSs, resulting in higher financial costs (up to AU21 per treatment episode) compared with INCS monotherapy. Conclusion: This study highlighted the significant burden posed on community pharmacy to address the needs of people with rhinitis symptoms, and the failure to translate the evidence that INCSs are the most effective monotherapy for moderate to severe and/or persistent rhinitis into clinical practice in light of the lack of evidence supporting combination of INCS and OAH therapy. Health care professional engagement, especially at the pharmacy level, will be extremely important if we wish to ensure that the purchase of rhinitis treatment is in accordance with guidelines and that their use is optimal.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)153-161
    Number of pages9
    JournalJournal of Asthma and Allergy
    Volume10
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 9 May 2017

    Bibliographical note

    This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

    Keywords

    • Community pharmacy
    • Intranasal corticosteroids
    • Oral antihistamines
    • Over-thecounter
    • Prescription
    • Rhinitis
    • Therapy

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Medication-related costs of rhinitis in australia: A nostradata cross-sectional study of pharmacy purchases'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Smith, P., Price, D., Harvey, R., Carney, A., Kritikos, V., Bosnic-Anticevich, S., Christian, L., Skinner, D., Carter, V., & Durieux, A. (2017). Medication-related costs of rhinitis in australia: A nostradata cross-sectional study of pharmacy purchases. Journal of Asthma and Allergy, 10, 153-161. https://doi.org/10.2147/JAA.S128431