• P-ISSN 0973-7200 E-ISSN 2454-8405
  • Follow us

Journal of Pharmaceutical Research

Article

Analysis of Package Inserts Available in the Indian Market
  • VIEWS 301
  • PDF 118

Journal of Pharmaceutical Research

DOI: 10.18579/jopcr/v23.2.17

Year: 2024, Volume: 23, Issue: 2, Pages: 107-110

Original Article

Analysis of Package Inserts Available in the Indian Market

Alay Patel1,∗, Vidhi Thaker2, Vipul Chaudhari3

1Resident Doctor (3rd year), Department of Pharmacology, GCS Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, Ahmadabad, Gujarat, India
2Assistant Professor, Department of Pharmacology, GCS Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, Ahmadabad, Gujarat, India
3Professor, Department of Pharmacology, GCS Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, Ahmadabad, Gujarat, India

*Corresponding Author
Email: [email protected]

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

Medicine has advanced, necessitating access to accurate drug information. Package inserts (PIs) are crucial sources, approved by authorities, providing essential and updated drug details. Package inserts significantly impact patient compliance and drug effectiveness in chronic therapy. This study examines Indian market PIs, evaluating information quality and accessibility to improve medication safety. A prospective observational cross-sectional study was carried out. A total of 300 package inserts were collected from various pharmacies situated across different sites in Ahmedabad. Package inserts were scored out of 21 based on assessment criteria, expressed as percentages, and analysed descriptively. A total of 300 package inserts were analysed, among them 130 were tablets, 81 were injections, 17 were capsules, 15 were eye drops and the rest includes syrup, ear drops, nasal drops, suppositories, powder, ointment, gel, cream, lotion and suspension. 209 PIs were single drug preparations while 91 were fixed dose combinations. More than 90% of the score was achieved by 37 PIs. 96 PIs had scored between range 81% to 90%, while 86 PIs had scored between 71% to 80%. Only 6 PIs had scored below 50%. Most commonly missing information was the average duration of treatment (83% of PIs), excipients (93% of PIs), and shelf life (81% of PIs). The finding of this study revealed that, although only 2% of PIs had scored below 50%, some crucial information was lacking from a major number of PIs. Regular review and collaboration among stakeholders ensure updated, reliable and comprehensive information, benefiting patient care and healthcare delivery.

Keywords: Drug information, Package insert, Indian market

References

  1. Chhaya MU. Analysis of package inserts of orally administered drugs available in the Indian market. International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences. 2017;5(2):529–532. Available from: https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20170145
  3. Ved JK. Package Inserts in India: Need for a Revision. International Journal of Pharma Sciences and Research. 2010;1(11):454–456. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/50434421_Package_Inserts_in_India_Need_for_a_Revision
  8. Prasad SN, Revankar SP, Vedavathi H, HM, Hegde S. Analysis of completeness of drug package inserts available in India. National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and Pharmacology. 2017;7(11):1139–1143. Available from: https://www.njppp.com/fulltext/28-1495829421.pdf
  9. Regner MJ, Hermann F, Ried LD. Effectiveness of a printed leaflet for enabling patients to use digoxin side-effect information. Drug Intelligence & Clinical Pharmacy. 1987;21(2):200–204. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3829914/
  10. Fuchs J, Hippius M, Schaefer M. Analysis of German package inserts. Int. Journal of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics. 2006;44(1):8–13. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16425965/
  11. Tayyem M, Takrouri MSM. Patient’s Safety Information Available On Drug Package Inserts Used In Neuroanesthesia. The Internet Journal of Anesthesiology. 2008;19(2):1–7. Available from: https://print.ispub.com/api/0/ispub-article/3088
  12. Didonet J, Mengue SS. Drug labels: are they a readable material? Patient Education and Counseling. 2008;73(1):141–145. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2008.05.004
  13. Fuchs J, Hippius M. Inappropriate dosage instructions in package inserts. Patient Education and Counseling. 2007;67(1-2):157–168. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0738399107001036
  15. Shivkar YM. Clinical information in drug package inserts in India. Journal of Postgraduate Medicine. 2009;55(2):104–107. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4103/0022-3859.52840
  17. Ramdas D, Chakraborty A, Swaroop HS, Faizan S, Kumar VP, Srinivas BN. A study of package inserts in southern India. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2013;7(11):2475–2477. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7860/jcdr/2013/6353.3583
  18. Lal A, Sethi A. Drug package inserts in India. Annals of Pharmacotherapy. 1996;30(9). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/106002809603000929
  19. Morris LA. Patient package inserts. A new tool for patient education. Public Health Reports. 1977;92(5):421–424. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1432037/
  20. Hermann F, Herxheimer A, Lionel ND. Package inserts for prescribed medicines: what minimum information do patients need? Br Med J. 1978;2:1132–1135. Available from: https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/2/6145/1132.full.pdf

Copyright

© 2024 Published by Krupanidhi College of Pharmacy. This is an open-access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) 

  • 06 August 2024

Year: 2024, Volume: 23, Issue: 2


More articles

DON'T MISS OUT!

Subscribe now for latest articles and news.