It's cheaper and it's the same thing. But the Italians don't trust them and continue to look for the "original". It is generic or equivalent drugs that create this skepticism, mainly due to insufficient information on the subject. In fact, "equivalent" drugs, as the word itself suggests, have the same active ingredient as the innovative drug. But if in Europe they cover about 50% of the market, in Italy they are struggling to reach a 15% share. Il Spending review decree wants to push towards greater consumption of generics, not only to align ourselves with the more advanced countries, but above all to try to save citizens a few euros to use to bring consumption back up.
From the side of the DOCTOR… – From now on, the text obliges the doctor to indicate in the prescription only the active ingredient of the drug, and no longer the name. Since 2001, pharmacists, when presented with a prescription with the name of an original drug, have to indicate to the customer the equivalent generic which translates into savings of at least 20% - by law, in fact, the generic must have a at least 20% lower price than the original. But not all pharmacists are committed to health education: if until now someone could afford to be lazy, now it's easier for them to present the various alternatives. However, unlike before, pharmacists can now also present the original (more expensive) drug to the consumer and if the patient agrees to pay the difference, no one can prevent him from doing so.
…from that of the PHARMACIST – But will the doctor really only indicate the active ingredient on the prescription? According to the decree, in fact, he has the possibility of writing the name of a specific drug, adding the prohibition of substitution with others. A more than legitimate observation: for example, if a patient is diabetic, there may be generics that contain sugars that he cannot take. But it shouldn't be enough to write "non-replaceable", the cause "non-replaceable because he is a diabetic patient" should be specified. It is therefore up to the informed citizen to always ask the doctor the reason for the non-substitutability of the drug and that this be put in writing.
SAVINGS for the STATE – Although someone has spoken of savings for Italy of over 500 million euros, the State does not gain anything directly. The national health system always reimburses the same price, equal to the price of the generic that costs less. The real saving of this provision is for the citizen who, by purchasing generics that are less expensive than the originals, will have greater availability to allocate part of his pharmaceutical expenditure to other sectors. For the State, whether the citizen buys the equivalent drug or the original does not change anything.
GENERATED – Few know them yet they are more and more. They are products equivalent to generics but which have a fancy name. Let's go in order. There is the original that everyone knows and whose advertising has generally been seen on television. Then there are the generics, which contain the same active ingredient as the original and have a compound name with this (for example nimesulide something - there are more than 60 different generics of this principle). And then there are the generics that are identical because they contain the same active ingredient but have a fancy name that doesn't necessarily recall it. And so the list gets longer. So if the doctor indicates a specific drug on the prescription, one wonders why, among more than 70 equivalent drugs, precisely that one was chosen. Unfortunately, the burden of information always rests with the citizen. That he must never let his guard down.
