Betahistine Prescribing Practices in England: An Analysis of Prescribing and National Spending Pre- and Post-BEMED Trial

Abstract

Objective Betahistine has not been proven to be superior to placebo in the BEMED study, a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled trial. Our study aimed to establish the prescribing practices of clinicians in England in relation to betahistine and to assess if there has been any change in prescribing practices since the publication of the BEMED trial. Study Design Retrospective study and clinician survey. Patients All patients who were prescribed betahistine from primary care. Main Outcome Measure Total quantity of betahistine prescribed and total actual cost. Results The average total monthly quantity prescribed was 11,143,253 tablets (range, 10,056,516–12,276,423). Prescribing did not decrease from the period before (January 2014–February 2016) to after (February 2016–February 2021) the publication of the BEMED trial, with the average monthly prescribing before publication being 11,294,848 tablets (range, 10,280,942– 12,276,423) and the average monthly prescribing after publication being 11,081,123 tablets (range, 10,056,516–11,915,707). The average actual monthly cost increased from the period before publication to after publication from a sum of £279,264.82 to a sum of £428,846.22. Most (90.5%) of the survey respondents prescribed betahistine for Menière’s disease. Less than half (38.09%) prescribed betahistine for indications other than Menière’s disease. Only 45.24% of the clinicians were aware of the results of the BEMED trial. Conclusions Knowledge of the BEMED trial among otology and neurotology subspecialists is lacking. The results of the BEMED have made no difference to prescribing practice, and in fact, the cost of the medication to the health bill has increased.