Are there potential problems with generic substitution of antiepileptic drugs?: A review of issues

In response to increasing cost pressures, healthcare systems are encouraging the use of generic medicines. This review explores potential problems with generic substitution of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). A broad search strategy identified approximately 70 relevant articles. Potential problems with generic substitution included: The limited evidence (mainly case reports with some pharmacokinetic studies) appears to support these concerns for older AEDs. As a result, restrictions on use of specific generic AEDs are in place in some countries and recommended by some lay epilepsy organisations. As more AEDs lose patent protection, it is important to examine the question of whether generic substitution may pose problems for patients with epilepsy, and whether there should be safeguards to ensure that both physician and patient are informed when generic substitution occurs.     

Laboratory diagnosis in Ontario and the need for reform relative to the profession of chiropractic

The purpose of this paper is to provide an historical review of the progression of events within the jurisdiction of the province of Ontario related to the issue of laboratory diagnosis and the profession of chiropractic. The provisions of relevant legislation, task forces, Councils, reviews, consensus statements, Commissions and committees, are highlighted and discussed during respective time periods. Chiropractors had entitlement to order and perform laboratory tests until 1972 when a regulatory amendment, made without consultation with the chiropractic profession, precluded their continuing entitlement. Chiropractic patients require access to diagnostic laboratory services and equitable access to necessary laboratory services should be restored and preserved. This is consistent with the academic institutional accreditation standards of chiropractic education and the jurisdictional regulatory mechanisms of chiropractic practice and is consistent with both protecting and enhancing the public interest.     

Systematic and random errors in compression testing of trabecular bone

We sought to quantify the systematic and random errors associated with-artifacts in the platens compression test for trabecular bone. Our hypothesis was that while errors may depend on anatomic site, they do not depend on apparent density and therefore have substantial random components. Trabecular bone specimens were first tested nondestructively using newly developed accurate protocols and then were tested again using the platens compression test. Percentage differences in modulus between the techniques (bovine) proximal tibia [n = 18] and humerus [n = 17] and human lumbar spine, [n = 9] were in the range of 4-86%. These differences did not depend on anatomic site (p = 0.21) and were only weakly dependent on apparent density and specimen aspect ratio (r² < 0.10). The mean percentage difference in modulus was 32.6% representing the systematic component of the end-artifact error. Neglecting the minor variations explained by density and specimen size (approximately 10%), an upper bound on the random error from end-artifacts in this experiment was taken as the SD of the modulus difference (±18.2%). Based on a synthesis of data taken from this study and from the literature, we concluded that the systematic underestimation error in the platens compression test can be only approximated and is in the range of 20-40%; the substantial random error (±12.5%) confounds correction, particularly when the sample size is small. These errors should be considered when interpreting results from the platens test, and more accurate testing techniques should be used when such errors are not acceptable.