Молодежный инновационный вестникМолодежный инновационный вестник2415-7805Федеральное государственное бюджетное образовательное учреждение высшего образования "Воронежский государственный медицинский университет имени Н.Н. Бурденко" Министерства здравоохранения Российской Федерации6491UnclassifiedANALYSIS OF THE EXPERIENCE OF THE USE OF ENTEROSORBENTS BY THE POPULATIONNaskevichDaniildanik.naskevich@mail.ruhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-8277-7125KorbutYanayanakorbuti@gmail.comhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-1900-08741405202110S14524561502202121022021Copyright © 2021, Молодежный инновационный вестник2021<p>The relevance of this work is determined by the constant changes and innovations taking place in the global pharmaceutical industry. Since the expansion of the drug markets and the increase in the range of products is inevitable, it is important to know which enterosorbents are preferable for patients old, time-tested and experienced positions, or new market items.<br />The purpose of the work is to study the experience of using enterosorbents by the population.<br />Materials and methods. The survey of people from different professional fields was conducted using Google Forms. The following indicators were taken into account: the effectiveness assessment, the frequency and method of use, the prevalence of various names and dosage forms. The respondents also had to answer the question whether they had taken combined enterosorbents and enterosorbents in combination with other drugs and dietary supplements.<br />Results. 310 people took part in the survey. According to the results of the survey, the most effective, recognizable and used enterosorbents were determined, taking into account the type of dosage form.<br />Conclusion. According to the results of the study, the absolute majority of respondents used carbon enterosorbents, in particular activated carbon in the classic tablet form due to its long stay on the market, affordability and wide prevalence among the population.</p>Assortment, combination, dosage form, registry, market, enterosorbentsАссортимент, комбинация, лекарственная форма, реестр, рынок, энтеросорбент<p>Analysis of the experience of using enterosorbents population</p>
<p>Actuality of work. Currently, the global pharmaceutical market is characterized by a constant expansion of the range, the emergence of new positions [1, 2]. This trend makes it possible for specialists to select medicines (drugs) for each patient, taking into account not only the indications and contraindications for humans, but also the price range of drugs. On the other hand, if the drug belongs to the group of drugs dispensed on an over-the-counter basis, the choice of the drug is completely left to the consumer. In this case, due to the expansion of the range or changes in the names of drugs, the consumer may not be aware of the availability of certain items. Despite the fact that the appropriate specialist can consult patients, quite often the consumer does not turn to such specialists for help, as a result of which he makes a choice in favor of a long-known and used position, whereas in a particular case it would be more rational to give preference to another representative of this group of drugs. Also quite an interesting problem is the incorrect use of drugs due to the fact that the patient is not sufficiently familiar with the possible use of this drug.As chelators are a group of drugs sold over-the-counter basis, and the range of this group of drugs is undergoing some changes (the emergence of the pharmaceutical market combined chelators, new dosage forms (LF)) [1,2], in this paper, the problem of insufficient familiarity of the consumer with a new position within the same pharmacological group, presented on the model of enterosorbents, found in the Belarusian pharmaceutical market.The purpose of this work is to study the experience of the use of enterosorbents by the population.Materials and methods. The method of conducting this study is a survey conducted between April and July 2020 using the Google Form. In the course of the study, such indicators as the assessment of the effectiveness of enterosorbents, the frequency and correctness of use, as well as the prevalence of various names and dosage forms of enterosorbents among the population of the Republic of Belarus (RB) were determined.During the survey, the respondents were offered a list of names of enterosorbents of different groups represented on the pharmaceutical market of the Republic of Belarus. The list of names of medicinal products included the following items: coal enterosorbents-Activated carbon (Exon, Belarus), activated carbon UBF (Uralbiopharm, Russia; JSC Exon, Belarus), Activated carbon E (JSC Exon, Belarus), Activated carbon MS (CJSC Medisorb, Russia); silicon - containing-Smecta (Beaufort Ipsen, France), Smectite (Exon, Belarus), Dioctite (Pharmtechnologia, Belarus), Smectosorb (Farmland, Belarus), Smectica ( Med-Interplast, Belarus), Smectite E (Exon, Belarus), Ultrasmectin (Rubicon, Belarus), Enterosgel (TNK Silma, Russia), White Coal Asset (Vneshtorg, Russia Pharma, Russia), White Coal (Omnifarma LLC, Kiev), Polisorb Plus (Polisorb CJSC, Russia), Eliminal (Orisil-Pharma, Ukraine), Eliminal gel (Orisil-Pharma, Ukraine); enterosorbents on the basis of natural dietary fiber - Polifan (PUE Admetech, Belarus), Integrin (In-Min, Russia), Integrin N (OOO-modulating, Russia), White sorbent Extra (OOO Bioterra, Belarus); as well as combined enterosorbents-Liquid coal with pectin for adults (Aquion, Russia), Liquid coal with pectin for children (Aquion, Russia) [3].The respondents were asked to answer questions about the recognition of certain items of the listed enterosorbents, the frequency of their use among the surveyed consumers, the most common LF of drugs when used, the opinion about the effectiveness of the listed names from the point of view of the respondents. To understand the pattern of the correct application of chelators consumers were asked about the purpose of this group combined chelators, refined, did respondents combinations of other drugs with chelators including whether applied by the participants of the survey chelators in combination with any drugs.At the end of the survey, mathematical processing of the data provided by the survey participants was carried out. The results of the study were summed up using the numerical evaluation of the indicators, as well as the construction of diagrams to illustrate the results of the survey.Results. The survey involved 310 people, including 253 female respondents (81.61%) and 57 male respondents (18.39%). Most of the respondents were between the ages of 18 and 25 (86.8%). The survey participants related to their professional activities not only to medicine (19.7%) and pharmacy (67.4%), but also to other professions in linguistic (2.1%), economics (1.9%), IT (2.1%), construction (1.6%), education (0.9%), law (1.5%) and other specialties (2.8%).According to the survey results, enterosorbents based on dioctahedral smectite were named the most recognizable (55%), among them Smecta is the most popular (93.5%). The second most recognizable among the population were coal-based enterosorbents (33.7 %), among them activated carbon and activated Carbon UBF (AU UBF) scored 88.1% and 82.6% of the respondents ' votes, respectively. 6.35% of respondents have encountered enterosorbents based on natural dietary fiber and 4.87% of respondents know about combined enterosorbents. In total, silicon-containing and carbon-based enterosorbents make up almost 90% of the total selection, which can indicate their wide distribution and variety of drugs based on dioctahedral smectite and activated carbon, as well as the fairly wide popularity and availability of coal-based enterosorbents among the population, which have been used in medical practice for many years. The popularity of Smekta can be explained by the low cost and convenience of LF enterosorbent for the consumer. The least recognizable names according to the survey results were enterosorbents based on dietary fiber Entegnin (5.8%) and Entegnin H (3.9%), as well as silicon-containing Eliminal (0.3%) and Eliminal gel (0.3%). Since these names have appeared relatively recently in the pharmaceutical market of the country, their low recognition is due to the novelty of these drugs.Further, based on the results of the survey, it can be concluded that the most often respondents use enterosorbents based on activated carbon and smectite dioctahedral enterosorbents, which occupy leading positions 57.72% and 37.10%, respectively. Among the coal enterosorbents, activated carbon and activated Carbon UBF (AU UBF) are again leading (73.9%), activated carbon E (28.7%). Among silicon-containing enterosorbents, Smekta again holds the primacy (61.9%). The third place was taken by enterosorbents based on natural dietary fiber 3.73%. Combined enterosorbents and 1% of the respondents who voted were on the fourth line. 0.31% of the survey participants did not use enterosorbents at all. Based on these answers, it can be concluded that the smectite of dioctahedral and carbon enterosorbents is universal, which is explained by their active use in food poisoning and stopping acute diarrhea. As we can see, in comparison with the previous indicator, the same names are leading, and the change in the percentage ratio is explained by a more convenient tablet form, in which coal is presented. Integrin (0,3%), Integrin N (0,3%), Liminal (0,3%) and Seminal gel (0.3 per cent) continues to occupy the last positions.</p>
<p>According to the efficiency index with a difference of one vote, the first line was divided between enterosorbents based on dioctahedral smectite and enterosorbents based on activated carbon (44.48% and 44.57%). Among them, according to respondents, the most effective are activated carbon (60.96%), activated carbon UBF (AU-UBF) (59.35%) and Smekta (59.35%), Activated carbon E (26.45%), Enterosgel (20.3%). 5.92% of respondents voted for enterosorbents based on dietary fiber. And only 3.40% of respondents voted for combined enterosorbents. The least effective enterosorbents were called Liquid coal with pectin for children, Entegnin, Entegnin H, which can be explained not only by the low assessment of the effectiveness of enterosorbents by the consumer, but also by poor familiarity with the new positions of enterosorbents. Another 0.9% of the survey participants consider enterosorbents to be ineffective drugs, 0.27% did not give a definite answer, and the same number of respondents believe that all the listed enterosorbents are effective.Among the LF, the respondents most often find tableted LF (99.7%), powders for the preparation of suspensions (74.8%), gels (31.3%), since the most popular enterosorbents among the population are represented by these LF. The least well-known LF are pastes (14.5%) due to the fact that in this LF enterosorbents are the least widely represented in the pharmaceutical market of the Republic of Belarus. As for the use of enterosorbents, based on the survey, the most common reasons for using this group of drugs are food poisoning (89%) and stopping acute diarrhea (44.8%). For the prevention or treatment of allergies, enterosorbents were used by 14.2% of the respondents. Among other reasons for the use of enterosorbents, heartburn, treatment of acne and acne, bloating, alcohol intoxication, heaviness in the stomach, nausea, food allergies, and CRF were also named. The use of enterosorbents to reduce body weight and prevent hangovers can be considered an irrational use. 0.3% of respondents did not use enterosorbents at all.When asked whether the respondents used enterosorbents in combination with other drugs/dietary supplements, 83.52% of the respondents gave a negative answer. 7.04% used enterosorbents together with other drugs, among which were named antihistamines: Loratadine, Linex, Loperamide, Stopdiar, Hofitol, as well as antiemetic drugs.Combinations of enterosorbents with other drugs / dietary supplements met only 4.8% of the survey participants (combinations with mint, chamomile, as well as such drugs as Eliminal, Eliminagel+Hofitol were named). Discussion. Thus, based on the survey data, the most popular among the population are enterosorbents based on activated carbon, they are also considered the most effective drugs. At the same time, the population is poorly informed about the availability of combined drugs, as well as about the variety of LF (mainly pastes, liquid LF, oral suspensions).In the course of the survey, it was found that consumers are not familiar with combined enterosorbents and in general, a small percentage of the study participants met combinations of enterosorbents with other drugs and dietary supplements. These results indicate the need for more thorough information of consumers about new products of the pharmaceutical market, as well as about the availability of new types of LF, because the most popular is the classic tablet LF, despite the appearance of such varieties as pastes, suspensions and liquid LF. The problem of improper use of enterosorbents is not acute, since the absolute majority of respondents used drugs in accordance with the indications for use and only in rare cases there was the use of drugs for other purposes. Conclusion. During the study, it was found that the highest demand among consumers enjoy chelators coal origin that is due not only to the price factor, but also a sufficiently long period of chelators such in the pharmaceutical market. Also quite popular enterosorbent is Smecta, which is a drug of natural origin, which includes aluminum and magnesium silicates. The same names were presented as the most frequently used and, accordingly, the most effective in the opinion of the majority of respondents who participated in the survey.</p>[1. Применение энтеросорбентов в клинической практике / В. Н. Панфилова, Т.Е. Таранушенко // Педиатрическая фармакология. - 2012. - №6 (9). - С. 34-38][2. Современные энтеросорбенты и механизмы их действия / В.Г. Николаев [и др.] // Эфферентная терапия. – 2005. - № 4. – С. 3-17.][3. Реестр свидетельств о государственной регистрации [Электронный ресурс]. – Режим доступа: http://gr.rcheph.by/. – Дата доступа: 03.12.2020.]