Drug selection in French university hospitals: Analysis of formularies for nine competitive pharmacological classes

British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

Volumn 72, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 823-831

  Gallini, Adeline ^a,b   Juillard Condat, Blandine ^a,b,c,d   Saux, Marie Claude ^e,f   Taboulet, Florence ^a,b,c  

^a Faculté de Médecine Centre Hospitalo universitaire   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PAUL SABATIER   (France)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DE TOULOUSE   (France)

^d TOULOUSE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (France)

^e UNIVERSITÉ DE BORDEAUX   (France)

^f BORDEAUX UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (France)

Author keywords

Decision making; Drug selection; Formulary; Hospital

Indexed keywords

ALPHA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT; ANGIOTENSIN RECEPTOR ANTAGONIST; ATORVASTATIN; CITALOPRAM; DIPEPTIDYL CARBOXYPEPTIDASE INHIBITOR; ERYTHROPOIETIN; ESOMEPRAZOLE; GRANISETRON; HYDROXYMETHYLGLUTARYL COENZYME A REDUCTASE INHIBITOR; LANSOPRAZOLE; LOW MOLECULAR WEIGHT HEPARIN; OMEPRAZOLE; ONDANSETRON; PANTOPRAZOLE; PAROXETINE; PERINDOPRIL; PROTON PUMP INHIBITOR; RAMIPRIL; SEROTONIN ANTAGONIST; SEROTONIN UPTAKE INHIBITOR; TROPISETRON;

ARTICLE; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DRUG FORMULARY; DRUG SELECTIVITY; DRUG UTILIZATION; FRANCE; HEALTH SURVEY; HOSPITAL COST; HOSPITAL ORGANIZATION; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL;

CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DRUG PRESCRIPTIONS; DRUG UTILIZATION; FORMULARIES, HOSPITAL; FRANCE; HOSPITALS, UNIVERSITY; HUMANS; PHARMACY SERVICE, HOSPITAL; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 80053916823     PISSN: 03065251     EISSN: 13652125     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2011.03997.x     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Agence française de sécurité sanitaire et des produits de santé. Les ventes de médicaments aux officines et aux hôpitaux en France: chiffres clés 2008. 2009. Available at (last accessed 15 March 2011).
2. Pearce MJ, Begg EJ. A review of limited lists and formularies: are they cost-effective? Pharmacoeconomics 1992; 1: 191-202.
3. Mannebach MA, Ascione FJ, Gaither CA, Bagozzi RP, Cohen IA, Ryan ML. Activities, functions, and structure of pharmacy and therapeutics committees in large teaching hospitals. Am J Health Syst Pharm 1999; 56: 622-8.
4. Weekes LM, Brooks C. Drug and Therapeutics Committees in Australia: expected and actual performance. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1996; 42: 551-7.
5. Duerden MG, Hughes DA. Generic and therapeutic substitutions in the UK: are they a good thing? Br J Clin Pharmacol 2010; 70: 335-41.
6. Thürmann PA, Harder S, Steioff A. Structure and activities of hospital drug committees in Germany. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1997; 52: 429-35.
7. Fijn R, Engels SA, Brouwers JR, Knaap RJ. De Jong-Van den Berg LT. Dutch hospital drug formularies: pharmacotherapeutic variation and conservatism, but concurrence with national pharmacotherapeutic guidelines. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2000; 49: 254-63.
8. Fijn R, Brouwers JR, Knaap RJ, De Jong-Van Den Berg LT. Drug and Therapeutics (D & T) committees in Dutch hospitals: a nation-wide survey of structure, activities, and drug selection procedures. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1999; 48: 239-46.
9. World Health Organisation collaborating centre for drug statistics methodology. ATC / DDD Index 2009. Available at (last accessed 15 March 2011).
10. Evain F, Minodier C. Les centres hospitaliers universitaires: entre activité de pointe et activité de proximité. Un essai de typologie. In: Les établissements de santé- Un panorama pour l'année 2007. DREES; 2010. p. 11-29.
11. Cohen J. others. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 1960; 20: 37-46.
12. Fleiss JL. The measurement of interrater agreement. In: Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions, New York: John Wiley and sons, 1981; 212-36.
13. Thompson WD, Walter SD. A reappraisal of the Kappa coefficient. J Clin Epidemiol 1988; 41: 949-58.
14. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-74.
15. Buusman A, Kragstrup J, Andersen M. General practitioners choose within a narrow range of drugs when initiating new treatments: a cohort study of cardiovascular drug formularies. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2005; 61: 651-6.
16. World Health Organisation. Model List of Essential Medicines, 16th edn. 2009. Available at (last accessed 15 March 2011).
17. Haute Autorité de Santé. Les inhibiteurs de la pompe à protons chez l'adulte. 2009. Available at (last accessed 15 March 2011).
18. Cour des Comptes. Les dépenses de médicaments. In: Rapport sur l'application des lois de financement de la sécurité sociale. 2007. p. 286-306. Available at (last accessed 15 March 2011).
19. Ouachi Z, Allenet B, Chouchane N, Calop J. [Drug selection for formularies in French hospitals]. Pharm Hosp 2010; 45: 57-65.
20. Segal R, Pathak DS. Formulary decision making: identifying factors that influence P&T committee drug evaluations. Hosp Formul 1988; 23: 174-8.
21. Juillard-Condat B, Blaisot M, Lafont J, Durand M-C. Achat de médicaments: La pondération des critères d'attribution des offres. Gest Hosp 2008; 479: 570-6.
22. Chren MM, Landefeld CS. Physicians' behavior and their interactions with drug companies. A controlled study of physicians who requested additions to a hospital drug formulary. JAMA 1994; 271: 684-9.
23. Lurie N, Rich EC, Simpson DE, Meyer J, Schiedermayer DL, Goodman JL, McKinney WP. Pharmaceutical representatives in academic medical centers: interaction with faculty and housestaff. J Gen Intern Med 1990; 5: 240-3.
24. Wazana A. Physicians and the pharmaceutical industry: is a gift ever just a gift? JAMA 2000; 283: 373-80.
25. Tyler LS, Cole SW, May JR, Millares M, Valentino MA, Vermeulen LC Jr, Wilson AL; ASHP Expert Panel on Formulary Management. ASHP guidelines on the pharmacy and therapeutics committee and the formulary system. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2008; 65: 1272-83.
26. Brennan TA, Rothman DJ, Blank L, Blumenthal D, Chimonas SC, Cohen JJ, Goldman J, Kassirer JP, Kimball H, Naughton J, Smelser N. Health industry practices that create conflicts of interest: a policy proposal for academic medical centers. JAMA 2006; 295: 429-33.