The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 279 No 7460 p33
14 July 2007

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

  Acrobat Reader

News summary

Legal battle launched against NHS prescribing incentives

NHS incentives used to encourage GPs to prescribe generic medicines are to be challenged in the High Court by the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry.

The ABPI has been given permission to pursue a judicial review against the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency for failing to enforce a legal prohibition on inducements to prescribe set out in the Medicines (Advertising) Regulations 1994.

An ABPI spokesman said: “We are seeking a declaration that Regulation 21 applies to all schemes under which doctors are offered direct or indirect financial incentives, whether offered by commercial, public or other bodies.” He added that the action is against the MHRA because that is the body responsible for enforcing the Regulations.

Clinicians should make judgements on appropriate medicines according to individual patient needs rather than prescribe the cheapest available, the spokesman said. The ABPI had been concerned for some time that primary care organisations’ prescribing policies had the sole aim of reducing cost.

“Additional payments may have been made to prescribers to prescribe low-cost medicines,” he said.

A statement issued by the ABPI added that guidance on prescribing issued by the Department of Health contained many provisions to safeguard patients, but failed to go far enough. It did not address the legal issue of payments to induce doctors to switch their prescribing from one specific medicine to another named medicine.

The statement added that the ABPI was ready to discuss the matter with the DoH at any time in order to avoid the need for the case to proceed to court.

A DoH spokesman said: “We will rigorously defend this legal challenge from the ABPI. The NHS could potentially save £84m if it switched to low-cost generic statins. These generic drugs are safe, of good quality and just as effective, and used to treat many millions of patients worldwide. The purpose of the legal provisions now contested by ABPI is to control commercial activities not the work of public health organisations.”