• Title/Summary/Keyword: Generic Drug

Search Result 62, Processing Time 0.019 seconds

Drugs Most Frequently Used in OPD of Yeungnam University Hospital: March to August, 1985 (영남대학교 의과대학 부속병원 외래환자에 대한 약물처방 동향의 분석)

  • Lee, Kwang-Youn;Kim, Won-Joon;Kim, Sung-Hoon
    • Journal of Yeungnam Medical Science
    • /
    • v.2 no.1
    • /
    • pp.95-102
    • /
    • 1985
  • This report offers descriptive data about the drugs utilized in out patient department (OPD) of Yeungnam University Hospital (YUH) in the period of march to august in 1985. The data in this report were produced by the computerized totalization of the number of mentions of individual drugs included in the prescriptions. The 100 drug entries that were most frequently recorded are listed in rank order. The listing is arbiturarily restricted to the drugs that were prescribed as single preparations, the drugs of basis of compound preparations and the drugs of adjuvent or corrective of compound preparations that have significant therapeutic effects either by generic names. And in addition, the listing also involves the compound preparations used in relatively large frequency, and the individual components of which have the unique pharmacological actions each other by proprietary names. And all routes of administrations were allowed. The 10 drugs most frequently named are diazepam, aluminum compounds, acetaminophen, isoniazid, metoclopramide, $polaramine^{(R)}$, carboxymethylcystem, ephedrine, codeine and caroverine in order. The 521,855 drug mentions listed as above are described by the chief therapeutic usage that each is intended to apply generally. The drugs which account the largest proportion of total mentions were those acting on the central nervous system (20.57%), including tranquilhzers and sedative hypnotics (11.71%), analgesic antipyretics (5.55%), antidepressants (2.15%) etc. Gastrointestinal drugs and smooth muscle preparations (18.64%) included antacids and anti-ulcer drugs (9.24%), antiemetics (3.57%), spasmolytics (3.14%) and others. Respiratory drugs (16.11%) included expectorants and cough preparations (10.99%) and bronchodilators (5.12%). Chemotherapeutic agents (15.12%) included the antiTbc drugs (7.09%) most frequently, and the penicillins (3.33%) accounted the largest proportion among the antibiotics. Cardiovascular drugs (5.64%) included cardiac drugs and coronary vasodilator (4.12%) and antihypertensives and vasodilators (1.06%). And anti-inflammatory drugs (4.33%), vitamins of single preparations (3.76%), hormones and their antagonists (3.29%), common cold preparations (3.12%), diuretics (2.81%), drugs supporting liver function (2.02%), drugs affecting autonomic nervous system(1.89%) including anti-glaucomas, atropine and cerebral vasodilators, antihistamine drugs (1.02%) and disinfectants (0.74%) were following in order. The data in this report were compared to those reported by H. Koch, et al. in United States (US), 1981 as "Drugs Most Frequently Used in Office Practice:National Ambulatory Medical Case Survey, 1981." Cardiovascular drugs prescribed in YUH were much less in proportion than in US (10.56%), but gastrointestinal drugs accounted the larger proportion than in US (3.72%). Expectorants and cough preparations in YUH also accounted the larger proportion than in US (2.74%). In conclusion, in the period of march to august, 1985, OPD of YUH prescribed the CNS drugs including diazepam most frequently, and gastrointestinal, repiratory and chemotherapeutic drugs in next orders. It is supposed that the eating habits of Koreans and a unique atmospheric condition in Taegu as a basin were some important factors that affected the proportions of drugs acting on gastrointestinal and respiratory tracts.

  • PDF

Antecedents of Manufacturer's Private Label Program Engagement : A Focus on Strategic Market Management Perspective (제조업체 Private Labels 도입의 선행요인 : 전략적 시장관리 관점을 중심으로)

  • Lim, Chae-Un;Yi, Ho-Taek
    • Journal of Distribution Research
    • /
    • v.17 no.1
    • /
    • pp.65-86
    • /
    • 2012
  • The $20^{th}$ century was the era of manufacturer brands which built higher brand equity for consumers. Consumers moved from generic products of inconsistent quality produced by local factories in the $19^{th}$ century to branded products from global manufacturers and manufacturer brands reached consumers through distributors and retailers. Retailers were relatively small compared to their largest suppliers. However, sometime in the 1970s, things began to slowly change as retailers started to develop their own national chains and began international expansion, and consolidation of the retail industry from mom-and-pop stores to global players was well under way (Kumar and Steenkamp 2007, p.2) In South Korea, since the middle of the 1990s, the bulking up of retailers that started then has changed the balance of power between manufacturers and retailers. Retailer private labels, generally referred to as own labels, store brands, distributors own private-label, home brand or own label brand have also been performing strongly in every single local market (Bushman 1993; De Wulf et al. 2005). Private labels now account for one out of every five items sold every day in U.S. supermarkets, drug chains, and mass merchandisers (Kumar and Steenkamp 2007), and the market share in Western Europe is even larger (Euromonitor 2007). In the UK, grocery market share of private labels grew from 39% of sales in 2008 to 41% in 2010 (Marian 2010). Planet Retail (2007, p.1) recently concluded that "[PLs] are set for accelerated growth, with the majority of the world's leading grocers increasing their own label penetration." Private labels have gained wide attention both in the academic literature and popular business press and there is a glowing academic research to the perspective of manufacturers and retailers. Empirical research on private labels has mainly studies the factors explaining private labels market shares across product categories and/or retail chains (Dahr and Hoch 1997; Hoch and Banerji, 1993), factors influencing the private labels proneness of consumers (Baltas and Doyle 1998; Burton et al. 1998; Richardson et al. 1996) and factors how to react brand manufacturers towards PLs (Dunne and Narasimhan 1999; Hoch 1996; Quelch and Harding 1996; Verhoef et al. 2000). Nevertheless, empirical research on factors influencing the production in terms of a manufacturer-retailer is rather anecdotal than theory-based. The objective of this paper is to bridge the gap in these two types of research and explore the factors which influence on manufacturer's private label production based on two competing theories: S-C-P (Structure - Conduct - Performance) paradigm and resource-based theory. In order to do so, the authors used in-depth interview with marketing managers, reviewed retail press and research and presents the conceptual framework that integrates the major determinants of private labels production. From a manufacturer's perspective, supplying private labels often starts on a strategic basis. When a manufacturer engages in private labels, the manufacturer does not have to spend on advertising, retailer promotions or maintain a dedicated sales force. Moreover, if a manufacturer has weak marketing capabilities, the manufacturer can make use of retailer's marketing capability to produce private labels and lessen its marketing cost and increases its profit margin. Figure 1. is the theoretical framework based on a strategic market management perspective, integrated concept of both S-C-P paradigm and resource-based theory. The model includes one mediate variable, marketing capabilities, and the other moderate variable, competitive intensity. Manufacturer's national brand reputation, firm's marketing investment, and product portfolio, which are hypothesized to positively affected manufacturer's marketing capabilities. Then, marketing capabilities has negatively effected on private label production. Moderating effects of competitive intensity are hypothesized on the relationship between marketing capabilities and private label production. To verify the proposed research model and hypotheses, data were collected from 192 manufacturers (212 responses) who are producing private labels in South Korea. Cronbach's alpha test, explanatory / comfirmatory factor analysis, and correlation analysis were employed to validate hypotheses. The following results were drawing using structural equation modeling and all hypotheses are supported. Findings indicate that manufacturer's private label production is strongly related to its marketing capabilities. Consumer marketing capabilities, in turn, is directly connected with the 3 strategic factors (e.g., marketing investment, manufacturer's national brand reputation, and product portfolio). It is moderated by competitive intensity between marketing capabilities and private label production. In conclusion, this research may be the first study to investigate the reasons manufacturers engage in private labels based on two competing theoretic views, S-C-P paradigm and resource-based theory. The private label phenomenon has received growing attention by marketing scholars. In many industries, private labels represent formidable competition to manufacturer brands and manufacturers have a dilemma with selling to as well as competing with their retailers. The current study suggests key factors when manufacturers consider engaging in private label production.

  • PDF