Advertisement
American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, Vol. 67, Issue 2, 128-135
Copyright © 2010 by American Society of Health-System Pharmacists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary material
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chung, S.
Right arrow Articles by Sohn, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Chung, S.
Right arrow Articles by Sohn, K.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Practice Report

Use of multiattribute utility theory for formulary management in a health system

 Seonyoung Chung, Sooyon Kim, Jeongmee Kim and Kieho Sohn

SEONYOUNG CHUNG, M.S., is Assistant Manager; SOOYON KIM, B.S., is Pharmacist; JEONGMEE KIM, M.S., is Manager; and KIEHO SOHN, PH.D., is Director, Department of Pharmaceutical Services, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Korea

Address correspondence to Ms. Sooyon Kim at the Department of Pharmaceutical Services, Samsung Medical Center, #50, Irwon-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Korea 135-710 (sooyon.kim{at}hotmail.com).


Purpose. The application, utility, and flexibility of the multiattribute utility theory (MAUT) when used as a formulary decision methodology in a Korean medical center were evaluated.

Methods. A drug analysis model using MAUT consisting of 10 steps was designed for two drug classes of dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs). These two drug classes contain the most diverse agents among cardiovascular drugs on Samsung Medical Center’s drug formulary. The attributes identified for inclusion in the drug analysis model were effectiveness, safety, patient convenience, and cost, with relative weights of 50%, 30%, 10%, and 10%, respectively. The factors were incorporated into the model to quantify the contribution of each attribute. For each factor, a utility scale of 0–100 was established, and the total utility score for each alternative was calculated. An attempt was made to make the model adaptable to changing health care and regulatory circumstances.

Results. The analysis revealed amlodipine besylate to be an alternative agent, with the highest total utility score among the dihydropyridine CCBs, while barnidipine hydrochloride had the lowest score. For ARBs, losartan potassium had the greatest total utility score, while olmesartan medoxomil had the lowest.

Conclusion. A drug analysis model based on the MAUT was successfully developed and used in making formulary decisions for dihydropyridine CCBs and ARBs for a Korean health system. The model incorporates sufficient utility and flexibility of a drug’s attributes and can be used as an alternative decision-making tool for formulary management in health systems.

Index terms: Amlodipine besylate; Angiotensin antagonists; Barnidipine hydrochloride; Calcium antagonists; Costs; Decision making; Economics; Formularies; Hospitals; Korea; Losartan potassium; Methodology; Models; Olmesartan medoxomil

 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?