The quality of medication information in Australia: the need for more clinical expertise and accountability

Jim R Stockigt
Med J Aust 2009; 190 (3): . || doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2009.tb02306.x
Published online: 2 February 2009

The current review of the Therapeutic Goods Administration is an opportunity to improve the system for updating product and consumer information on drugs

Pharmaceutical product information (PI) and consumer medicines information (CMI) are mandatory for prescription products in Australia, and government regulations specify that CMI must be consistent with PI.1 Health professionals and consumers should be able to assume that these sources are up-to-date and consistent with evidence-based best practice. However, this is not necessarily so, particularly for older medications.2,3 There is a wide discrepancy between the high-quality information available for new medications (eg, through series such as NPS RADAR [National Prescribing Service Rational Assessment of Drugs and Research]) and some existing texts2-4 that originate from pharmaceutical sponsors, who pay fees to the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) for review and approval of their submitted material.

  • Jim R Stockigt1,2,0

  • 1 Epworth and Alfred Hospitals, Melbourne, VIC.
  • 2 Monash University, Melbourne, VIC.



remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.