Pharmacologic and Liability Considerations of Therapeutic Interchange with Low-Molecular-Weight Heparins

Abstract

Therapeutic interchange (TI), a formulary management process, is used by health care systems to help contain medication costs. A scientifically defensible and pharmacoeconomically beneficial TI program adheres to rigorous criteria enforced by an institution's Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee. In situations where adherence to essential criteria is not mandated, TI may not produce the intended clinical and economic outcomes, and in practice may have legal implications. Appropriate application of TI has been described within the position statements of certain health care organizations and associations. Due to the high cost and frequent use of low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs), health care institutions have identified this pharmacologic class as a potential target for TI. Currently, the application of the TI process to LMWHs is questionable. This paper reviews the TI process and explores its controversial role in the formulary management of LMWHs.

Keywords

low-molecular-weight heparins therapeutic interchange

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Shah

N.D.

, Vermeulen

L.C.

, Santell

Projecting future expenditures— 2002.

Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2002; 59(2): 131–42.

Cacciatore

G.G.

Liability for formulary decisions.

Pharmacy Management Advisor. 1997.

American Society of Hospital Pharmacists.

ASHP statement on the formulary system.

Am J Hosp Pharm. 1992; 49: 648–52.

Food and Drug Administration Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Approved Drug Product page. FDA Web site. Available at: http//www.fda.gov/cder/ob/docs/preface/ecpreface.htm. Accessed December 6, 2002.

Ringold

D.J.

, Santell

J.P.

, Schneider

P.J.

ASHP national survey of pharmacy practice in acute care settings: Prescribing and transcribing— 1998.

Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1999; 56(2): 142–57.

American College of Clinical Pharmacy.

Position statement on the guidelines for therapeutic interchange.

Pharmacotherapy. 1993; 13(3): 252–6.

Managed care pharmacy fact sheet: Therapeutic substitution. Alexandria, VA: Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy; 1996.

American Medical Association. AMA policy on drug formularies and therapeutic interchange in inpatient and ambulatory care settings. Available at: www.ama-assn.org. Accessed July 2002.

American College of Physicians.

Therapeutic substitution and formulary systems.

Ann Intern Med. 1990; 113(2): 160–3.

10.

2001 Consensus on the Scientific Basis for Therapeutic Interchange: Application to LMWHs. Pittsburgh, PA; 2000.

11.

Hillman

D.E.

, Wurdeman

R.L.

, Lenz

T.L.

Therapeutic change of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors in patients with coronary artery disease.

Pharmacotherapy. 2001; 21(4): 410–5.

12.

Nelson

W.W.

, Vermeulen

L.C.

, Geurkink

E.A.

Clinical and humanistic outcomes in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease converted from omeprazole to lansoprazole.

Arch Intern Med. 2000; 160(16): 2491–6.

13.

Dolovich

L.R.

, Ginsberg

J.S.

, Douketis

J.D.

A meta-analysis comparing low-molecular-weight heparins with unfractionated heparin in the treatment of venous thromboembolism: Examining some unanswered questions regarding location of treatment, product type, and dosing frequency.

Arch Intern Med. 2000; 160(2): 181–8.

14.

McCart

G.M.

, Kayser

Therapeutic equivalency of low-molecular-weight heparins.

Ann Pharmacother. 2002; 26: 1042–57.

15.

Lovenox (enoxaparin sodium) injection [package insert]. Bridgewater, NJ: Aventis Pharmaceuticals; November 2001

16.

Fragmin (dalteparin sodium) injection [package insert]. Kalamazoo, MI: Pharmacia and Upjohn; June 2000.

17.

Innohep (tinzaparin sodium) injection [package insert]. Wilmington, DE: DuPont Pharma; July 2000.

18.

Mammen

E.F.

, Arcelus

, Messmore

Clinical differentiation of low-molecular-weight heparins.

Semin Thromb Hemost. 1999; 25(suppl 1): 135–44.

19.

Ryan

T.J.

, Antman

E.M.

, Brooks

N.H.

1999 update: ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction).

J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999; 34(3): 890–911.

20.

Hirsh

, Warkentin

T.E.

, Shaughnessy

S.G.

Heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin mechanisms of action, pharmacokinetics, dosing, monitoring, efficacy and safety.

Chest. 2001; 119(suppl):64S–94S.

21.

Department of Defense (DOD) Pharmacoeconomic Center. Minutes of the DoD Pharmacy and Therapeutics Executive Council Meeting, June 6, 2001.

22.

Bollinger

K.A.

, Vermeulen

L.C.

, Davis

S.N.

, Geurkink

E.A.

Comparative effectiveness of low-molecular-weight heparins after therapeutic interchange.

Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2000; 57(4): 368–72.

23.

Burnakis

T.G.

Therapeutic interchange of low-molecular-weight heparins.

Am J Health Sys Pharm. 2000; 57: 1707–98.

24.

Merli

G.J.

, Vanscoy

G.J.

, Rihn

T.L.

Applying scientific criteria to therapeutic interchange: A balanced analysis of low-molecular-weight heparins.

Journal of Thromb Thrombolysis. 2001; 11(3): 247–59.

25.

Nolen

K.D.

Low-Molecular-weight heparins: Development of a therapeutic interchange program [abstract].

Pharmacotherapy. 2001; 21: 97.

26.

Abood

R.R.

Cut pharmaceutical costs, but mind the legal dangers.

Managed Care. 1997;6(8): 47–8, 51–4.

27.

Brushwood

D.B.

Legal issues surrounding therapeutic interchange in institutional settings: An update.

Formulary. 2001; 36: 796–804.