Drug prescribing patterns in the General Medical Services Scheme in Ireland and projected costs to 2026

The primary objective is to investigate the main factors contributing to GMS expenditure on pharmaceutical prescribing and projecting this expenditure to 2026. This study is located in the area of pharmacoeconomic cost containment and projections literature. The thesis has five main aims: 1. To determine the main factors contributing to GMS expenditure on pharmaceutical prescribing. 2. To develop a model to project GMS prescribing expenditure in five year intervals to 2026, using 2006 Central Statistics Office (CSO) Census data and 2007 Health Service Executive{Primary Care Reimbursement Service (HSE{PCRS) sample data. 3. To develop a model to project GMS prescribing expenditure in five year intervals to 2026, using 2012 HSE{PCRS population data, incorporating cost containment measures, and 2011 CSO Census data. 4. To investigate the impact of demographic factors and the pharmacology of drugs (Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC)) on GMS expenditure. 5. To explore the consequences of GMS policy changes on prescribing expenditure and behaviour between 2008 and 2014. The thesis is centered around three published articles and is located between the end of a booming Irish economy in 2007, a recession from 2008{2013, to the beginning of a recovery in 2014. The literature identified a number of factors influencing pharmaceutical expenditure, including population growth, population aging, changes in drug utilisation and drug therapies, age, gender and location. The literature identified the methods previously used in predictive modelling and consequently, the Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS) model was used to simulate projected expenditures to 2026. Also, the literature guided the use of Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression in determining demographic and pharmacology factors influencing prescribing expenditure. The study commences against a backdrop of growing GMS prescribing costs, which has risen from e250 million in 1998 to over e1 billion by 2007. Using a sample 2007 HSE{PCRS prescribing data (n=192,000) and CSO population data from 2008, (Conway et al., 2014) estimated GMS prescribing expenditure could rise to e2 billion by2026. The cogency of these findings was impacted by the global economic crisis of 2008, which resulted in a sharp contraction in the Irish economy, mounting fiscal deficits resulting in Ireland's entry to a bailout programme. The sustainability of funding community drug schemes, such as the GMS, came under the spotlight of the EU, IMF, ECB (Trioka), who set stringent targets for reducing drug costs, as conditions of the bailout programme. Cost containment measures included: the introduction of income eligibility limits for GP visit cards and medical cards for those aged 70 and over, introduction of co{payments for prescription items, reductions in wholesale mark{up and pharmacy dispensing fees. Projections for GMS expenditure were reevaluated using 2012 HSE{PCRS prescribing population data and CSO population data based on Census 2011. Taking into account both cost containment measures and revised population predictions, GMS expenditure is estimated to increase by 64%, from e1.1 billion in 2016 to e1.8 billion by 2026, (ConwayLenihan and Woods, 2015). In the final paper, a cross{sectional study was carried out on HSE{PCRS population prescribing database (n=1.63 million claimants) to investigate the impact of demographic factors, and the pharmacology of the drugs, on GMS prescribing expenditure. Those aged over 75 (ẞ = 1:195) and cardiovascular prescribing (ẞ = 1:193) were the greatest contributors to annual GMS prescribing costs. Respiratory drugs (Montelukast) recorded the highest proportion and expenditure for GMS claimants under the age of 15. Drugs prescribed for the nervous system (Escitalopram, Olanzapine and Pregabalin) were highest for those between 16 and 64 years with cardiovascular drugs (Statins) were highest for those aged over 65. Females are more expensive than males and are prescribed more items across the four ATC groups, except among children under 11, (ConwayLenihan et al., 2016). This research indicates that growth in the proportion of the elderly claimants and associated levels of cardiovascular prescribing, particularly for statins, will present difficulties for Ireland in terms of cost containment. Whilst policies aimed at cost containment (co{payment charges, generic substitution, reference pricing, adjustments to GMS eligibility) can be used to curtail expenditure, health promotional programs and educational interventions should be given equal emphasis. Also policies intended to affect physicians prescribing behaviour include guidelines, information (about price and less expensive alternatives) and feedback, and the use of budgetary restrictions could yield savings.

Identifying novel molecular mechanisms of ghrelin receptor signalling underlying neural control of food intake: interaction with stress and impulsivity

The gut-hormone, ghrelin, activates the centrally expressed growth hormone secretagogue 1a (GHS-R1a) receptor, or ghrelin receptor. The ghrelin receptor is a G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) expressed in several brain regions, including the arcuate nucleus (Arc), lateral hypothalamus (LH), ventral tegmental area (VTA), nucleus accumbens (NAcc) and amygdala. Activation of the GHS-R1a mediates a multitude of biological activities, including release of growth hormone and food intake. The ghrelin signalling system also plays a key role in the hedonic aspects of food intake and activates the dopaminergic mesolimbic circuit involved in reward signalling. Recently, ghrelin has been shown to be involved in mediating a stress response and to mediate stress-induced food reward behaviour via its interaction with the HPA-axis at the level of the anterior pituitary. Here, we focus on the role of the GHS-R1a receptor in reward behaviour, including the motivation to eat, its anxiogenic effects, and its role in impulsive behaviour. We investigate the functional selectivity and pharmacology of GHS-R1a receptor ligands as well as crosstalk of the GHS-R1a receptor with the serotonin 2C (5-HT2C) receptor, which represent another major target in the regulation of eating behaviour, stress-sensitivity and impulse control disorders. We demonstrate, to our knowledge for the first time, the direct impact of GHS-R1a signalling on impulsive responding in a 2-choice serial reaction time task (2CSRTT) and show a role for the 5-HT2C receptor in modulating amphetamine-associated impulsive action. Finally, we investigate differential gene expression patterns in the mesocorticolimbic pathway, specifically in the NAcc and PFC, between innate low- and high-impulsive rats. Together, these findings are poised to have important implications in the development of novel treatment strategies to combat eating disorders, including obesity and binge eating disorders as well as impulse control disorders, including, substance abuse and addiction, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and mood disorders.

Impact of different pack sizes of paracetamol in the United Kingdom and Ireland on intentional overdoses: a comparative study

BACKGROUND: In order to reduce fatal self-poisoning legislation was introduced in the UK in 1998 to restrict pack sizes of paracetamol sold in pharmacies (maximum 32 tablets) and non-pharmacy outlets (maximum 16 tablets), and in Ireland in 2001, but with smaller maximum pack sizes (24 and 12 tablets). Our aim was to determine whether this resulted in smaller overdoses of paracetamol in Ireland compared with the UK. METHODS: We used data on general hospital presentations for non-fatal self-harm for 2002-2007 from the Multicentre Study of Self-harm in England (six hospitals), and from the National Registry of Deliberate Self-harm in Ireland. We compared sizes of overdoses of paracetamol in the two settings. RESULTS: There were clear peaks in numbers of non-fatal overdoses, associated with maximum pack sizes of paracetamol in pharmacy and non-pharmacy outlets in both England and Ireland. Significantly more pack equivalents (based on maximum non-pharmacy pack sizes) were used in overdoses in Ireland (mean 2.63, 95% CI 2.57-2.69) compared with England (2.07, 95% CI 2.03-2.10). The overall size of overdoses did not differ significantly between England (median 22, interquartile range (IQR) 15-32) and Ireland (median 24, IQR 12-36). CONCLUSIONS: The difference in paracetamol pack size legislation between England and Ireland does not appear to have resulted in a major difference in sizes of overdoses. This is because more pack equivalents are taken in overdoses in Ireland, possibly reflecting differing enforcement of sales advice. Differences in access to clinical services may also be relevant.