This is the first time the answer has come with its own limits attached. Appreciated.
15 likes 2mo
Access · Shortages · continued
Official shortage notices and what they authorise posts 91–120
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
Regional differences during a shortage are large, and a supply position in one country says nothing about another.
6 likes 2mo
Shortages end and the notices are updated. Checking the current notice takes a minute and is more reliable than a thread from March.
The literature is thinner on this than the confidence in the thread implies.
1 like 2mo
v.salgado, post #53: Saving this. It is the version I will quote when the question comes round again. Go to post
Taking post #93 at face value and following it one step further.
Manufacturer allocation decisions during a shortage are commercial and are rarely explained, which is frustrating and is not evidence of anything.
If this contradicts something upthread, the upthread version may well be the better one.
citation_peak, post #13: Worth separating two things that post #10 runs together. A shortage of one presentation is not a shortage of all of them, and the published notices are specific about which. Go to post
Everything in post #93 holds. The case it does not cover is the one I have.
The bit of official shortage notices that nobody enjoys is that the answer changes depending on what you are trying to decide with it. Say what the decision is and the thread will converge.
Compounding during shortages: some jurisdictions allow pharmacy compounding when a marketed product is in shortage. That permission is jurisdiction-specific and time-limited (usually for the duration of the shortage).
Flagging that the sources on this are thinner than the confidence in the thread suggests.
0 likes 2mo
h.fonseca, post #45: Taking post #44 at face value and following it one step further. Official shortage notices: I would want to see the raw numbers rather than the summary before agreeing. Summaries lose exactly the information that would settle this. Go to post
The most useful contribution is a link to the current official notice rather than an account of one pharmacy.
It is worth stating the boring hypothesis before the interesting one.
no.silva, post #3: Adding the measurement that the opening post says would settle it. Anyone reporting availability should say the region and the date, because both determine whether the report is usable. The conclusion is tentative; the arithmetic underneath it is not. Go to post
Switching presentation or strength during a shortage is a prescribing decision rather than a substitution anybody should improvise.
The strength of my opinion here exceeds the strength of my evidence.
Confirming post #97 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.
Reframing official shortage notices slightly, because I think the disagreement is about the question rather than the answer. If the question is "does it happen", yes. If it is "how often", nobody here knows.
1 like 2mo
Compounding during shortages: some jurisdictions allow pharmacy compounding when a marketed product is in shortage. That permission is jurisdiction-specific and time-limited (usually for the duration of the shortage).
7 likes 2mo
Managing an unplanned gap: if a shortage causes a gap in treatment, the questions are how long the gap will be and how that affects your condition. Discussing with your clinician is prudent if the gap is weeks or longer.
The claim is narrower than it sounds, and deliberately so.
1 like 2mo
t.kulkarni, post #87: Managing an unplanned gap: if a shortage causes a gap in treatment, the questions are how long the gap will be and how that affects your condition. Discussing with your clinician is prudent if the gap is weeks or longer. This has been discussed before and I could not find the thread, so, again. Go to post
I had written a reply contradicting post #101 and deleted it. Here is what survived.
Both are useful and different. The notice tells you the national position; the account tells you what is happening on the ground.
i.wojcik, post #65: This follows post #62 rather than contradicting it. Shortage status determines what compounding is permitted in some jurisdictions, which links two questions that otherwise seem unrelated. Go to post
Confirming post #101 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.
Counterpoint on official shortage notices, offered without confidence: the same observation is consistent with a much duller explanation, and nobody has ruled the dull one out.
j.teixeira, post #56: Taking post #54 at face value and following it one step further. I have no financial interest in anything named in this thread and I want to say so before I comment on official shortage notices, because it is the sort of subject where it matters. Go to post
The honest answer on official shortage notices is that it depends, and the useful part is the list of what it depends on. Four items, in rough order of how much they matter.
Most people get the first two right and then argue about the fourth.
The arithmetic in post #108 is right; the assumption feeding it is the part to check.
Where a shortage forces a gap, the pharmacokinetics mean a missed week is a perturbation rather than a reset, which is worth knowing.
That is what I would do. It may not be what is correct.
12 likes 1mo
a.villalobos, post #1: Posting this under the heading it deserves: Official shortage notices and what they authorise Everything below is what sits behind that. Trying to work out what would count as evidence on official shortage notices, before collecting any. This is the part I usually skip and it is the part that makes the rest useful. If two explanations… Go to post
Helpful, and short, which on this subject is harder than long.
GDashwood, post #26: No disagreement from me. Posting only so the question does not look ignored. Go to post
Reports that a pharmacy has stock are the least durable information on the site and are still worth posting with a date.
It is one reading of the data and not the only reasonable one.
Adding a small correction to the official shortage notices summary above rather than a disagreement with it. The substance holds; one of the figures is out by a factor that matters.
2 likes 1mo
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Adding the measurement that post #113 says would settle it.
Supply interruptions: official shortage notices are published by regulatory agencies. That is the correct primary source rather than pharmacy rumors or forum discussion.
m.ramos, post #104: Confirming post #101 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person. Counterpoint on official shortage notices, offered without confidence: the same observation is consistent with a much duller explanation, and nobody has ruled the dull one out. Go to post
What I want from this official shortage notices thread is the list of things that would need to be true for the claim to hold. If we can write that list, we can check it.
Where I part company with post #114, and it is a narrow parting.
Dose hold versus tapering: if a temporary shortage forces a gap, holding your dose and resuming when supply returns is different from gradually tapering. The two are different decisions.
I looked this up rather than remembered it, which is the right order.
0 likes 1mo
VPoulsen, post #68: Switching presentation or strength during a shortage is a prescribing decision rather than a substitution anybody should improvise. I would rather be precise about what I do not know than vague about what I do. Go to post
Useful. I had the fact and not the reason, which turns out to be the important half.
MSaarinen, post #95: Everything in post #93 holds. The case it does not cover is the one I have. The bit of official shortage notices that nobody enjoys is that the answer changes depending on what you are trying to decide with it. Say what the decision is and the thread will converge. Go to post
Reports that a pharmacy has stock are the least durable information on the site and are still worth posting with a date.
Someone should write this up properly, and it should probably not be me.
Suggested topics
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Managing an unplanned gap in supply
Managing an unplanned gap in supply — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. A narrow question about managing an unplanned gap, deliberately narrow, because the broad version has…
|
+105 | 110 | 5.1k | 3mo |
|
How shortages have affected compounding permissions — does this still hold?
How shortages have affected compounding permissions — does this still hold? — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Asking about shortages directly, because I…
|
+27 | 31 | 21k | 17h |
|
Coming back to: Official shortage notices and what they authorise
Official shortage notices and what they authorise Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Official shortage notices — I have the observation and I do not trust my…
|
+85 | 92 | 5.5k | 11mo |
|
Managing an unplanned gap in supply — what changed since
On the subject in the title: Managing an unplanned gap in supply — what changed since Working notes rather than a conclusion. What changes if the standard account of Managing an unplanned gap is wrong? I ask…
|
+114 | 124 | 54k | 8mo |
|
How shortages have affected compounding permissions
How shortages have affected compounding permissions I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. I would like to know what people here actually do about shortages,…
|
+61 | 71 | 3.6k | 2d |
Related topics — sharing the tags compounding, formulary, shortage
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Prior authorisation: what the criteria usually require
On the subject in the title: Prior authorisation: what the criteria usually require Working notes rather than a conclusion. I would like to know what people here actually do about prior authorisation, as…
|
+9 | 13 | 3.2k | 17mo |
|
List price versus negotiated price versus what you pay
On the subject in the title: List price versus negotiated price versus what you pay Working notes rather than a conclusion. List price versus negotiated price — I have the observation and I do not trust my…
|
+99 | 115 | 11k | 3mo |
|
External review after an internal denial
External review after an internal denial Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Proposing that external review deserves a maintained page rather than a recurring…
|
2 | 18k | 1mo | |
|
Why a compound being unapproved is not the same as being illegal to possess
Why a compound being unapproved is not the same as being illegal to possess I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Collecting what is known about compound…
|
+72 | 78 | 23k | 3mo |
|
Peer-to-peer review: what actually happens on the call — one year on
Peer-to-peer review: what actually happens on the call — one year on — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. The question about Peer-to-peer review that I actually want answered…
|
+2 | 6 | 41k | 5mo |