| • The profession (3)
• NPC (3)
• Community pharmacy
• Prescription pricing
• Wholesaling
• Anticoagulation
• Dispensing
• The Society (3)
• Regulation
• Fees consultation (2)
• Retention fees (2)
• Listening friends
• The Journal
Letters to the Editor
|
Dispensing
Medicines use review might ease confusion over modified release preparations
From Mr N. J. Staunton, MRPharmS
I am a little confused as to which modified release preparations should
be brand-prescribed and which should not.
In his letter (PJ, 11 August, p155), child psychiatrist David
Coghill discussed the importance of ensuring patients receive
the same formulation of methylphenidate MR. Dr Coghill discussed the
launch of Medikinet XL
with the result that there are now two MR methylphenidate brands available
(Medikinet XL and Equasym XL). He then discussed the differences in release
profile between these.
He concluded that methylphenidate MR should be
prescribed by brand name to ensure patients receive the same preparation.
This advice is entirely consistent with the BNF (number 53, March 2007)
which states: “Avoid creating generic names for modified-release
preparations”.
However, advice
from the Royal Pharmaceutical Society in 2006 (PJ, 18
November 2006, p620) and Bandolier Extra in 2007 (May 2007)
says that MR morphine preparations are interchangeable. The Society says
that it
no longer recommends routine brand name prescribing of MR morphine and
fentanyl patches.
I wonder if there is a role for community pharmacists to use medicines
use reviews (alongside primary care trust guidance) to ensure that methylphenidate
MR, and other deserving MR preparations, are prescribed by brand while
those undeserving are not.
I note that there are still few
MURs being conducted compared with the 400 allowed per pharmacy
in England and Wales (PJ, 21 July, p63). Noel Staunton
Pharmaceutical Consultant
Binstead, Isle of Wight
|