A mock pharmacy and therapeutics committee evaluation of encainide is presented. In evaluating a new drug for formulary inclusion, the first question is whether it is effective for the stated indications. Then, the role of the new drug relative to standard therapy should be considered. With encainide, as with other antiarrhythmic agents, determination of the superiority of a drug is difficult because results of comparative studies are strongly influenced by criteria for efficay, characteristics of the patient population, and the study design. Encainide appears to be similar in efficacy to flecainide, disopyramide, quinidine, and procainamide. Proarrhythmic and other adverse effects are important considerations with antiarrhythmic agents. A decision as to whether the new drug is a first-line agent must be made, and the need for implementation of methods for ensuring appropriate use must be considered. Beneficial and undesirable effects of one method, restricted prescribing, are discussed. Evaluation of new antiarrhythmic agents is a complex process.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||3|
|Issue number||3 II|
|State||Published - Jan 1 1987|
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Pharmaceutical Science