Affordable Access

Prescribing and dispensing practices for oral iron tablets: a Canadian experience.

Authors
  • Delorme, M A
  • Gwadry-Sridhar, F H
  • Inwood, M J
Type
Published Article
Journal
DICP : the annals of pharmacotherapy
Publication Date
Sep 01, 1990
Volume
24
Issue
9
Pages
874–877
Identifiers
PMID: 2260348
Source
Medline
License
Unknown

Abstract

The formulation of an oral iron tablet may influence its therapeutic efficacy in correcting iron deficiency. In order to determine the oral iron preparations patients in a Canadian urban center were receiving, a questionnaire was circulated to family physicians, internists, surgeons, and obstetrician-gynecologists to determine their prescribing practices. A survey of pharmacies in the city was also conducted to determine which brand of each iron salt (sulfate, gluconate, fumarate) they dispensed for a generic oral iron prescription. Most physicians (74 percent) chose ferrous sulfate as their drug of first choice. The majority of prescribers would not specifically request either enteric-coated/slow-release or nonenteric-coated preparations as first or second choices (71 and 64 percent, respectively). Enteric-coated or slow-release preparations were specified by 10 and 19 percent of physicians as first and second choices, respectively. Most pharmacies (96 percent) dispensed an enteric-coated preparation of ferrous sulfate for a generic prescription. We believe that many patients are receiving iron tablets with altered release properties (enteric-coated/slow-release). These tablets may fail to provide the desired therapeutic benefit based on the known physiology of iron absorption.

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times