#l ~d & d ~ 

From Vwal and Health Statlstlcs of the National Center for Health Statlstlcs Number 86 ● October 8, 1982 

Drug Utilization in Office Visits to Primary Care Physicians: 

National Ambulatory Medical ‘Care Survey, 1980 

By Beulah K. Cypress, Ph. D., Division of Health Care Statistics 

Introduction 

This report presents statistics on drug utilization 

during office visits to general and family practitioners, 

internists, pedlaticians, and obstetrician-gynecologists, 

i@e physicians generally acknowledged to be most 

~,wolved in the delivery of primary health care. The 

data were gathered in 1980 by the National Center for 

Health Statistics by means of the National Ambulatory 

Medical Care Survey. 

For purposes of health manpower legislation (PL 94-

484, 1976), Congress identitled general and family 

practitioners, internists, and pediatricians as primary 

care providers. However, it is the policy of the American 

Medical Association to include obstetrician-gynecologists in the group of primary care providers. A 1978 

Institute of Medicine study defined primary health care 

in terms of the scope, character, and integration of the 

services provided.1 The report indicated that although 

primary care may be provided by many types of health 

professionals and by physicians in many diflierent 

specialties, the physicians whose practice content fit 

the dimensions of primary care most closely were 

general and family practitioners, internists, pediatricians, and obstetrician-gynecologists. The National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey was the principal source 

of data used by the Institute of Medicine to describe the 

content of primary health care. 

The National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey is 

a probability sample survey conducted annually through 

.1981 by the Division of Health Care Statistics of the 

National Center for Health Statistics. The technical 

iotes at the end of this report provide brief ini30nnat.ion 

about the source of the data, sampling errors, and 

deftitions of terms. A complete description of the survey including limitations and definitions was published 

in Vital and Health Statistics, Series 13, No. 66.2 The 

methodology used to collect and process the drug information is described in Vital and Health Statistics, 

Series 2, No. 90.3 

The Patient Record form used in the 1980 survey is 

reproduced in figure 1. Up to eight specific drugs, either 

new or continued during the visit, maybe recorded by the 

physician in item 11, parts a and b. In order to present 

accurately what the physician ordered, prescribed, or 

provided, drug mentions used in this report are based on 

the physicians’ entries on the Patient Record forms. 

These entries were brand or generic names of prescription 

(~) or nonprescription (over-the-counter) drugs, and in 

some irstances the physician recorded a therapeutic 

effect; e.g., “allergy relief.” 

Data highlights 

Visit characteristics . 

Primary care physicians constituted 54 percent of the 

NAMCS physician universe, but had 66 percent of the 

office visits and accounted for 74 percent of all drug mentions (table 1). Among this group of physicians, general 

and family practitioners (GFP’s) had a disproportionately 

large share of visits and drug mentions. They had 33 percent of the visits and 41 percent of the drug mentions 

although they represented only 23 percent of the physician 

universe. Obstetrician-gynecologists (OBG’S) accounted 

for only 5 percent of the drug mentions compared with 10 

percent of the visits, mainly because a relatively large 

proportion of their visits involve prenatal and postpartum 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service 
ethe,

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2 

ASSURANCE OF CONFIOENTALITV-A,I ,nto, nu,,ci wh,ch WC, JMP,, m,, ,den,,f,rat,o. &D.r,lnen! of malt!! ●nd n“nm” ser.,.,, 01 an tti,vd~,, . .,ac, c,. or .“ ●,,8bh,hm, w,II be held mmf,de”,! .1, w,IILw “wd ml, Phl,c Hc,l,ll saw., 

b, PC,lom ●nsm@d ,. md for the kmrmses .1 !h. wwv ●nd .$41 not be dwclmed or W. I mfe= d tiaIth *=.Ch, SW,,,,,,, .nd Techndoqy 

I 

D 749612 Nald t.OH$o”, wu-d 1., .“. ml,,, ..,.c.sc titm”.1 tinter for Health s,,,,,,,<, J- ..

& NATIONAL 

PATlENT RECORD 

AMBULATORY MEDICAL CARE SURVEY J

I 

cm PATIENT’S COMPLAINT, SYMPTOM(S), OR OTHER 

R EASON{S) FOR ~ VISIT [In patient k own wordsI 

. MOST IMFORTAMT 

ZE:E ‘“iii;: HISPANIC b OTHER 

=l=_ ‘“+=~~~’”” 7. ~:l:hRcOO:,OR THIS & DIAGNOSTIC SERVICES THIS VISIT g- PHYSICIAN’S OIAGNOSES 

\Check all ordered or providedl 

, ❑ NONE 8 m EKG PRINcIpAL oIAGNosIs/pRoELEM As$ocIATEO WITH ITEM S9. 

, ❑ AC”TEPRCKELEM ‘cl LIMITED HISTORY/EXAM , ~ VISION TEST. 

2 ❑ cMRoNIc PRO13LEM, ROUTINE JDGENERAL H,STORY,EXAM ,oDENOOSCOPY 

3 ❑ CHRONIC PR08LEM, FLAREUP , ❑ PAP TEST ,, ~ M:4#STAT”S 

OTHER SIGNIFICANT CURRENT OIAGNQSES 4 ❑ POSTS”R GERY/POST INJuRY 5 ❑ Clinical LAEITFS7 

5 ❑ NONtLLNESSCARE (ROLIT,NE X RAV 

,2 ❑ OTI+ER (Sptclfy 

PRENATAL. GENERAL EXAM ‘cl 

WELL 8ABV. ETC I 7 ~BLOOD PRESSURE CHECK 

10. HAVE YOU SEEN 11, MEDICATION THERAPY THIS VISIT ❑ NONE 

PATIENT BEFORE7 I Using bmnd or gwneric nmnss, reconi all new and continued medications otiered, injected, administered, or otherwti 

provided at this vim. Include immunizing and dexnn”tizing agsn ES\ 

d. FOR PPINCIPAL DIAGNOSES IN ITEM% b. FOR ALL OTHER REASONS 

1 1. 

t IF YES. FOR THE 

CONDITION IN 2 2 

ITEM 9.? A 

3 3. 

I ❑ YES 2 ❑ NO 

4 4 

12- NON-MEDICATION THERAP 13.::’p:;~ l~m DISPOSITION THIS VISIT 15mOURATION 

\Check all services #rdemd or provided this .isir/ [Check (7II that 17pply/ OF THIS 

FOR THIS VISIT VISIT 

BY A~HER ❑ NO FOLLOW.UP PLANNEO \ Time acfually 

10NONE ‘cl DIET COUNSELING PHYSICIAN? ❑ RETURN AT5pECIFIEDTIME spent with 

physician / 

2 ❑ physiotherapy ‘cl FAMILY/SOCIAL ❑ RETIJRNIF NEEDEO.p.R.N 

COUNSELING 

3 ❑ OFFICE SURGERY ❑ TELEPHONE FOLLOW-UP PMNNED 

4 ❑ FAMILY PLANNIN13 “cl MEDICAL COUNSELING ❑ REFERRED TO OTHER PHYSICIAN 

5 ❑ Psychotherapy/ ‘n OTHER (S”.<,/,, 

lJRETuflNEOTOREFE flRING PHYSICIAN THERAPEUTIC LISTENING 

❑ ADMIT TO HOSPITAL 

M,..,,, 

s l__JOTHER ,s,<<,,,, 

PHS4105-D (9/79} OMB No. S8-H1498 

Figure 1. Patient Record from the Netional Ambulato~ Medical Care Survey 

care, and examinations for which drugs are generally not 

indicated. 

The patterns of medication therapy presented in this 

report differ by specialty because drug utilization is 

highly related tQ the patient’s age, sex, and condition. 

Although GFP’s, internists, pediatricians, and OBG’S 

provide primary care, their patients have different demographic characteristics and present more, or less, of certain diagnoses. Patterns of medical care thus vary depending on the case-mix. Table 2 shows the distribution of 

office visits to primary care physicians by age and sex of 

the patient. By age group, GFP’s see a more heterogeneous group of patients than do the other physicians. 

Internists provide care chiefly to adults over 24 years of 

age, and to a larger proportion of patients over 44 years of 

age (69 percent) than do GFP’s (44 percent). Pediatricians chiefly treat children under 15 years of age. Visits 

by women in the child-bearing years, 15–44, account for 

87 percent of the OBG’S caseload. Because medication 

therapy, diagnosis, and the patient’s age and sex are 

highly intercorrelated, the range of drug utilization a 

the classes of drugs prescribed vary among speciali.T 

OffIce visits and drug mentions 

The number of ofllce visits, the number and percent 

of visits in which one or more drugs were prescribed (drug 
dmcd#fi3 

visits), and the number of drug mentions are shown in 

T 

r 

.@ble 3. The drug mention rate is the number of drug menons divided by the number of visits; e.g., GFP’s re-

.orded an estimated 279,186,000 drug names on 

Patient Record forms during 191,744,000 visits, which 

results in a drug mention rate (DMR), or average over 

all visits, of 1.46 drugs per visit. Another approach to 

measuring drug use is to divide the number of drug mentions by the number of drug visits (a visit in which one 

or more drugs were ordered). Thus, when drugs were 

prescribed, the average number a patient received (drug 

intensity rate, DIR) when visiting a GFP was 1.93. The 

percent of drug visits and the DIR are used in this report 

to make comparisons among specialties. 

Proportions of total visits with one or more drugs 

prescribed were similar for GFP’s (75 percent), internists(76 percent), and pediatricians (71 percent). Only 

44 percent of OBG’S visits included any drugs, reflecting the large volume of visits for routine prenatal care 

and gynecological examinations. However, the frequency 

of drug visits varies by age of the patient. The rising 

proportions of drug visits after age group 15–24 years 

for GFP’s and internists is shown in figure 2, in which 

there is a striking similarity in the configuration of the 

two curves. 

In figure 3 proportions of drug visits to GFP’s are 

compared with those to pediatricians. Children under 

1 years of age who visited GFP’s were more likely to 

e given at least one medication than were their counterparts who visited pediatricians. This effect was the most 

. 

90 

Internal 

medicine ~ 80 

0 

\ 0 

E 0 General and 

/“ 

E 70 \ family practice 

\’ ‘$ 

p 

60 k 

J’ 

4’ c)~ Under 15–24 25–44 45-64 65 

15 and 

over 

Age in years 

I 

Figure 2. Percent of drug viaita by age of patient and selected primary care 

physician specialty United States, 1980, 

pronounced for the age group 3–5 years. Although the 

GFP routinely treats children in the same age range as 

those of the pediatrician, visits to the pediatric specialist are more likely to be for routine examinations where 

medication therapy is not always indicated. Two preventive health care diagnoses, health supervision of 

infant or child and general medical examination, accounted for 27 percent of visits to pediatricians by 

25 and 

f- Under 3 3-5 6-10 11–14 15-24 25-44 45–64 65 

and 

over 

1 Age in years 

Figure 3, Percent of drug visits by age of patient and selected primary care physician special~ United States, 1980 

I 
4 

children under 11 years of age compared with only 16 

percent of those to GFP’s. 

An even more marked difference is evident in figure 4 in which proportions of drug visits by the age 

group of women visiting GFP’s and OBG’S are plotted. 

Percents are consistently higher for GFP’s than for 

OBG’S. The curves exhibit a similar pattern of change 

except that women’s drug visits to GFP’s decline until 

age group 15–24 years while the low point of drug visits 

to OBG’S is at age group 25–44 years. The lower proportions of drug visits found in the OBG’S practice is 

explained by the preponderance of visits with diagnoses 

of normal pregnant y, postpartum care, and gynecological examinations (a total of 48 percent of all visits). 

Only 7 percent of women’s visits to GFP’s were represented by these diagnoses. 

On the average, the highest number of drugs 

prescribed during drug visits was by internists, with a 

rate of 2.24 drugs per drug visit, followed by GFP’s 

with 1.93 (table 3). These rates are plotted by patient 

age group in figures 5–7. Figure 5 illustrates drug intensity rates for GFP’s and internists. As expected, rates 

increase with increasing age after age group 15–24 

years, regardless of which of the two specialists was 

visited. At that point, however, the curves diverge, and 

beginning with age group 25–44 years, internists prescribed higher numbers of medications than GFP’s did. 

90 r 

80 General and 

family practice 

70 

1~ 

60 

\ / 

\ Obstetrics and / 

50 \ gynecology 

/ 

\ 

\ / 

40 NJ 

30 

I 

Q~ 

LJndar 15-24 25–44 45–64 65 

15 and 

over 

Age in years 

Figure 4. Percent of drug visits bysge of female patient snd selected primaty 

care physician specialty: United States, 1980 

2,70 

2,50 0’ 

Intarnal /-

medicine / 

2.30 / 

I 

/ 

2.10 / 

I 

1.90 

1.70 

1.50 J’

‘f 

o~ 

Under 15-24 25–44 45-64 65 

?5 and 

over 

Age in years 

Figura 5. Drug intensity rate by age of patient and selacted primary car, ~ 

physician specialty: United States, 1980 

Differential diagnosis is likely to contribute to this difference in rates. 

Although it was shown in figure 3 that a higher percent of visits by children under 11 years of age to GFP’s 

included one or more drugs than did those to pediatricians, figure 6 shows that when drugs were used, the 

average numbers prescribed by both types of physicians 

were very close. 

For every age group shown in figure 7, GFP’s prescribed a higher average number of drugs than OBG’S 

did, and the number prescribed tended to increase with 

increasing age group after 15–24 years for GFP’s and 

after 25–44 years for OBG’S. The data illustrated in 

figures 4 and 7 reveal that not only did GFP’s have 

more drug visits, but they also prescribed more drugs 

during those visits than OBG’S did. However, these 

findings are clearly related to the lower proportion of 

illness-related visits made to OBG’S, as noted previously. 

Number of medications 

The proportions of visits that included precisel, 

one, two, three, or four or more drugs are listed .intabler 

4. In the first part of this table distributions are based on 

all visits and thus they include a “none” category. In the 

lower section, distributions are based on the number of 
&ncedata 5 

2.50 r 

General and familv wactice / 

O\ 25,nd 

0 over / / 

0 

Under 3-5 6-10 11-14 15-24 25-44 45-64 65 

3 and 

over 

Age in years 

L 

Figure 6. Drug intensity rate by age of patient and selected primary care physician specialty United States, 1980 

o 

drug visits and, therefore, arrays do not include the 

“no-ne” category. The proportio-ns in this category are 

simply the complements of the percents of drug visits 

shown in table 3. For patients treated by GFP’s, internists, and pediatricians, the largest proportions of visits 

were in the category of one drug mention, but the 

majority of visits to OBG’S had no drugs mentioned. 

When OBG’S did order drugs, 72 percent of visits 

included only one. Internista were more likely than 

other primary care physicians to order three or more 

drugs. About 34 percent of their drug visits included 

this number compared with 24 percent of GFP’s, 13 

percent of pediatricians, and 7 percent of OBGS. This 

was not unexpected in view of their relatively high proportion of visits by the elderly. It has been shown that, 

in general, and for certain diagnoses, the number of 

drugs ordered increases as the patient’s age group 

increases.1-6 

Drug status characteristics 

NAMCS drug data are characterized by entry 

status (brand name,a generic entity, or therapeutic effect), prescription status (prescription or over-tliecounter drug), and composition status (single ingredient, 

combination drug, or multivitamin). Drug mentions are 

distributed by these variables in table 5. The most common method employed by physicians to enter drugs on 

aInclusion of brand or trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by the Pablic Health Service or the U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Sewices. 
---

6 a(klncedata 

2.50 

2.30 

2.10 General and 

family practice 

.= 

.: 1.90 

m 

~ 

u 

: 

: 1.70 z

K 

/ 

1.50 Obstetrics and / 

gynecology / 

‘+. / 

1.30 

, 

/ 

o 

Under 15–24 25-44 45-64 65 

15 and 

over 

Age in years 

Figure7. Drug intensity rate byageoffemale patient andselectedorimarv 

;are physician apec;al~ United ”States, 1980 

the Patient Record form was by brand name. GFP’s, 

internists, and OBG’S used brand names (manufacturer’s 

product name) in over 70 percent of mentions; pediatricians in about 58 percent. Pediatricians are more likely 

than other specialists to enter drugs by generic name 

because of their frequent use of immunizing agents and 

other injectable drugs. Prescription drugs were also 

more frequently ordered than over-the-counter drugs, 

ranging from 76 percent of mentions by OBG’S to 85 

percent of those by internists. Drugs consisting of a 

single principal ingredient were more likely to be 

prescribed than combination drugs byintemists, GFP’s, 

pediatricians, and OBG’S, in declining order of frequency. 

The NAMCS file also includes information on the 

Federal control status of each drug utilized. Drugs 

under the regulatory control of the Drug Enforcement 

Administration of the U.S. Department of Justice are 

assigned by them to one of five schedules based on 

potential for abuse and psychological or physical 

dependence, ranging from schedule I with the highest 

potential for abuse and dependence to schedule V with 

the lowest (see reference 3 for a more detailed explanation of the schedules and examples). Drug mentions are 

classfled in table 5 according to whether they are controlled or uncontrolled drugs. A very small proportion 

of drugs listed by primary care physicians were federally controlled, amounting to 11 percent of all mentions 

by GFP’s, 8 percent by internists, and 5 percent each o { 

those by pediatricians and OBG’S. For GFP’s, intern ‘ 

m ists, and OBG’S, the majority of controlled drugs were 

in schedule IV (53, 58, and 62 percent, respectively). 

For pediatricians, 62 percent of controlled drugs mentioned were in schedule V. 

Therapeutic categories 

Each specific drug mentioned in NAMCS is a 

member of a group of drugs identiiled by the desired 

therapeutic effect. These groups are based on the classification system of the American Hospital Formulary 

Service.T Drug mentions are aggregated by therapeutic 

categories in table 6. The leading category of drugs used 

varied among the primary care physicians, reflecting the 

demographic and clinical characteristics oftheirpatients. ~ 

For GFP’s, central nervous system drugs accounted for 

the largest share of their mentions ( 19 percent). Internistsused cardiovascular drugs (21 percent) proportionately more often than other drugs. Pediatricians most 

often used anti-infective agents (29 percent). Hormones 

and synthetic substitutes constituted the major portion 

of mentions by OBG’S (26 percent). 

The five leading categories prescribed by both 

GFP’s and internists, although in different order of 

frequency, were anti-infective agents; cardiovascular 

drugs; central nervous system drugs; electrolytic, caloric, o 

and water balance; and hormones and synthetic substitutes. These five categories accounted for 62 percent of 

drug utilization by GFP’s and 70 percent of that by 

internists. Three of these classes were also among the t 

five most frequently used by OBG’S: anti-infective 

agents, central nervous system drugs, and hormones 

and synthetic substitutes. Two other categories frequently ordered by OBG’S were skin and mucous membrane preparations (10 percent) and vitamins (19 percent). Pediatricians prescribed antihistamine drugs; 

expectorants and cough preparations; and serums, 

toxoids and vaccines proportionately more frequently 

than did the other primary care physicians. 

Specific drug mentions 

Because GFP’s see a large number of patients in 

every age group ranging from infants to the elderly, the 

number and percent of the most frequently ordered 

specific drugs are ranked by age group in table 7. The 

other primary care specialties have a more homogeneous 

patient load. Therefore, specific drugs are listed but not 

shown by age group, for internists (chiefly adults) in 

table 8, for pediatricians (chiefly children) in table 9, 

and for OBG’S (chiefly women 15–44 years of age) in 

table 10. The reader is cautioned that estimates may ● 

not differ from other near estimates due to sampling 

variability. Therefore, ranks may be somewhat artificial. 

To treat patients under 15 years of age with medica-
m 

w 

m 

tion therapy, GFP’s prescribed Ampicillin, Amoxicillin, 

and Penicillin in a total of 11 percent of drug mentions. 

imetapp was the leading antihistamine ordered (4 

ercent). Diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and pertussis 

vaccine (DPT), and poliomyelitis vaccine each accounted for 4 percent of mentions. Aspirin was mentioned in 3 percent. 

Penicillin and Ampicillin led the list of drugs 

mentioned when patients visiting GFP’s were 15–24 

years old or 25–44 years old. However, the variety of 

drugs ordered changed perceptibly beginning with age 

group 25-44 years. While 16 drugs accounted for 42 

percent of mentions for patients under 15 years, it took 

twice as many or more to account for about the same 

proportion of mentions for patients in the three older 

groups. The diuretic, Lasix, appears for the first time 

among the leading drugs ordered for patients 25–44 

years of age. Over 1 million mentions of chorionic 

gonadotropin, a hormone frequently associated with a 

diagnosis of obesity, also appear on the list for 25–44 

year old patients as well as three anorexients used in the 

treatment of obesity: Ionarnin, Fastin, and Phentermine 

(all three are the generic entity phentermine, making a 

total of 1.7 million mentions of this substance). 

An increase in the number of different diuretics 

utilized in treating patients 45–64 years old reflects the 

increase of cardiovascular problems. Dyazide, Lasix, 

ydrodiuril, Hygroton, and Hydrochlorothiazide were 

ong the top 10 drugs ordered for this age group. 

Inderal, a drug often used to treat hypertension and certain heart conditions, was the second leading number of 

mentions. Inderal, as well as the previously mentioned 

diuretics were also among the most frequently mentioned drugs when patients were in the 65 years and 

over age group. Also frequently prescribed for this age 

References 

lNational Academy of Sciences, Institute of Medicine: A manpower policy for primary health care. IOM Pub. No. 78-02. 

Washington. May 1978. 

2National Center for Health Statistics, R. Gagnon, J. DeLozier, 

and T. McLemore: The National Ambulatory Medical Care 

Survey, 1979 summary. Vital and Health Statistics. Series 13-No. 

66. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS) 82–1727. Public Health Service. 

Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office. In press. 

3National Center for Health Statistics, H. Koch: The collection ~d 

recessing of drug information, National Ambulatory Medical Care 

urvey, United States, 1980. Vital and Health Statistics. Series 

2-No. 90..DHHS Pub. No. (PHS) 82–1364. Public Health Service. 

Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, Mar. 1982. 

4National Cenkr for Health S~tiStiCS,H. Koch: Drug utilization in 

office-practice by age and sex of the patient, National Ambulatory 

aduancedata 7 

group were Lanoxin and Digoxin, cardiovascular drugs 

both in the generic class digoxin; Aldomet, a hypotensive agent; and Motrin, which is commonly used to treat 

arthritis. The anti-diabetic agents Diabinese and Insulin 

were also among the leading medications ordered by 

GFP’s for older patients. 

The list of drugs prescribed by internists (table 8) 

closely resembles the lists of those used by GFP’s for 

patients 45 years of age and over. One drug used by internists that is not among the most commonly used by 

GFP’s is Fluorouracil, an antineoplastic agent. 

Poliomyelitis vaccine accounted for 7 percent and 

DPT for 6 percent of all drugs mentioned by pediatricians. The tuberculin tine test was used in 5 percent. 

Antibiotics were prominently represented by Arnoxicillin, Penicillin, Amoxil, Ampicillin, E. E. S., Bicillin, 

Larotid, V-Cillin, Erythromycin, and Ilosone. Many of 

the drugs used by pediatricians were also prominent in 

the section of table 7 (GFP’s) showing the most frequent 

drugs ordered for patients under 15 years of age. 

The multivitamins, Prenatal formula, Materna, 

Stuartnatal 1+1, and Natalins were among the drugs 

ordered most frequently by OBG’S. Table 10 also 

shows that Ortho-novum, Lo/ovral, Ovral, Demulen, 

and Norinyl were the most commonly prescribed oral 

contraceptives. Other drugs such as Premarin (estrogen), 

Monistat (used for candidiasis), Flagyl (used fortrichomoniasis), and Suhrin (for vaginal infections) reflect 

the range of diagnoses made by OBG’S. 

These and other data on the practice characteristics 

of primary care physicians in 1980 and 1981 will 

appear in a future Vital and Health Statistics Series 13 

publication. Questions regarding this report may be directed to the Ambulatory Care Statistics Branch by 

calling 301/436-7 132. 

Medical Care Survey, United States, 1980. Advance Data From 

Vital and Health Statistics, No. 81. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS) 81-

1250. Public Health Service. HyattsviUe, Md. July 26, 1982. 

5National center for He~t,h Statistics, B. K. Cypress: Medication 

therapy in oilice visits for hypertension, National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, 1980. Advance Data From Vital and Health 

Statistics, No. 80. DHHS Pub. No.(PHS)81-1250. Public Health 

Service. Hyattsville, Md. July 22, 1982. 

6National Center for Health Statistics, ELK. Cypress: Medication 

therapy in ofllce visits for selected diagnoses, National Ambulatory 

Medical Care Survey, 1980. Vital and Health Statistics. Series 13-

No. 71. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS) 82–1732. Public Health Service. 

Washington. In preparation. 

7~eric~ society of HospitalPharmacists, Inc.: The American 

Hospital Formulary Service. Washington. Jan. 1980. 
8 acklncedata 

Table 1. Number and percent distribution of physicians in NAMCS physician universe and percent distribution of visits and drug mentions, by physician 

specialty United States, 1980 

I 

Physician specialty NAMCS physician universe Visits Drug 

Percent Number Percent distribution distribution 

Total physicians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227,558 100.0 100.0 100.0 

Total primary care physicians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . .’. . . . . . . . 122,635 53.9 66.2 74.2 

General and family practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,147 23.4 33.3 41.1 

internal medicine, ., ., .,...,.,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,199 15.5 12.1 17.5 

Pediatrics, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,043 7.1 11.2 10.7 

Obstetrics and gynecology ..,...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,246 8.0 9.6 4.9 

Other specialties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104,923 46.1 33.8 25.8 

Table 2. Percent distribution of visits by age and sex of patient, according to primay care physician specialty United States, 1980 

Primary care physician 

Age and sex of patient General and Internal Obstetrics and Pediatrics family practice medicine gynecology 

Percent distribution 

Alleges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

Under 15 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.9 2.5 92.5 1.0 

16-24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.9 7.1 5.9 32.0 

45–64 

25-44 

65 years 

years

years 

and 

.

.

over 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. 

.

.

.

. 

. 

. .

. 

. 

. .

. 

. 

. . . . 

24.4 

27,4 

19.4 

36.4 

21.4 

32.7 “0.2 

“0.4 

1.0 55.1 

2.5 

9.4 ●

Sex 

Female . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60.5 59.2 46.3 98.7 

Male . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39.5 40.8 53.7 1.3 

Table 3. Number of office visits, number and percent of drug visita, number of drug mentions, drug mention rate, and drug intensity rate per visit, 

by primary care physician special~: United States, 1980 

Primary care physician All visits 

in thousands 

Drug visits~ 

in thousands 

Percent 

drug visits 

Drug mentions 

in thousands 

Drug mention 

rate 2 

per visit 

Drug int~”ty 

rate 

per drug visit7 

General and family practice ., 191,744 144,478 75.3 279,186 1.46 1.93 

Internal medicine........,.,., . . 69,481 53,091 76.4 118,943 1.71 2.24 

Pediatric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64,223 45,575 71.0 72,825 1:13 1.60 

Obstetrics and gynecology. . . . 55,123 23,984 43.5 33,026 0.50 1.38 

1A visit in which one or more drugs were prescribed 

‘Drug mentions A number of visits. 

3Dr”g ~e”tio”~ + number of drug visits. 
advancedata 9 

Table 4. Number and percent distribution of office visits by number of medications for all visita and for drug visits, according to primary care physician specialty 

United States, 1980 

T Primary care physician 

Number of medications 

General and 

family practice 

Internal Pediatrics medicine 

Obstetrics and 

gynecology 

Number in thousands 

All visits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191,744 69,481 64,223 55,123 

Percent distribution 

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

None . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24.7 23.6 29.0 56.5 

l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34.4 29.1 40.4 31.2 

2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23.0 21.4 21.6 9.3 

3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.5 13.0 6.4 2.3 

4 or more . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.6 13.1 2.5 0.8 

Number in thousands 

Drug visitsl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144,478 53,091 45,575 23,984 

Percent distribution 

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45.6 38.1 57.0 71.7 

; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30.5 28.0 30.5 21.3 

3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.9 17.0 9.0 5.2 

4 or more . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.0 16.9 3.6 1.8 

1A “i~it in which one or more drugs were prescribed. 

P 

Table 5. Number and percent distribution of drug mentions by selected drug status characteristics, according to primary care physician special~ 

United States, 1980 

Primary care physician 

Drug status characteristic 

General and Internal Obstetrics and Pediatrics family practice medicine gynecology 

Number in thousands 

All drug mentions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279,186 118,943 72,825 33.026 

Percent distribution 

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

Entry status 

Generic name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24.3 24.3 34.9 17.5 

Brand name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71.2 72.8 57.8 77.8 

Therapeutic effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.7 2.1 6.5 3.6 

Undetermined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.8 0.8 0.8 1.1 

Prescription status 

Prescription drug . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83.4 84.6 79.6 75.9 

Nonprescription drug . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.0 12.5 13.1 19.4 

Undetermined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.6 2.9 7.3 4.8 

Composition status 

Single ingredient drug . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68.3 78.2 58.9 47.5 

Combination drug . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.3 18.1 32.5 32.6 

~ Multivitamin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.0 0.8 1.3 15.3 

Ph$fndetermined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5 2.9 7.3 4.7 

Tyl Federal control status 

Controlled . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.9 8.2 4.6 5.2 

Uncontrolled . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84.5 88.9 88.0 90.0 

Undetermined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.6 2.9 7.3 4.8 
10 

Table 6. Number and percent distribution of drug mentions by therapeutic catego~, according to primary cara physician specialty: Unitad Statea, 1980 

Primary care physician 

Therapeutic categoryl 

General and Internal Obstetrics an r Pediatrics family practice medicine gynecology 

All categories ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279,186 118,943 72,825 33,026 

Percent distribution 

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 100,0 100,0 100,0 

Antihistamine druga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,6 3.9 15.2 2.3 

Anti-infective agenda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.2 6.9 28.8 16.9 

Antineoplastic agenda, .,.,..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *O. 1 3.4 *o. 1 

Autonomic drugs,.,.,.,...,.,.,.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,,. 4.4 3.6 3.0 *1,5 

Blood formation and coagulation.,.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4 1.5 “0.3 3.5 

Cardiovascular drugs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,.,.,,,. 9.9 20,7 “0.2 2.5 

Central newoussyatem drugs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.5 18,2 4.8 8,0 

Diagnostic agents, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,,, 0.3 “0.2 4.7 *O. 1 

Electrolytic, caloric, and water balance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., 9,1 14.3 “0,3 3.1 

Expectorants and cough preparations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 1.9 6.8 “0.9 

Eye, ear, noaeand throat preparationa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4 0.8 3.4 ‘0.5 

Gastrointestinal drugs, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,., 4.6 4.7 1.6 *1.6 

Hormones and synthetic substitutes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.1 9,7 1,7 26.4 

Serums, toxoids and vaccines...,., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.7 0.9 17.8 “0.9 

Skin andmucoua membrane preparations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,9 2.4 5.9 9,9 

Spasmolytic agents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,. 1.7 2.3 2.2 “0.5 

Vitamins, ., ., ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 2.3 80,5 18.6 

Other, unclassified, orundetarmined. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.9 2.4 2.9 3.0 

18a~ed o“ the classification system of the American Hospital Formulaw Serwce (A. H. F.S.). See raference ~. 
dmcdata 11 

Table7. Number andpercent distribution ofdrugmentiona inoffice viaitsto general and family practitioners byageof patient andmostfrequently named drugs: 

United States, 1980 .-. 

Number of Number of 

Age of patient mentions Percent Age of patient mentions Percent 

and name ofdrug~ in distribution and name of drugl in distribution 

thousands thousands 

Under 15 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,497 100.0 45–64 years. . ., .,, ,,, ,. . . . . . . 77,235 100,0 

Ampicillin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,326 4.3 Dyezide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,421 1.8 

Poliomyelitis vaccine..,.,.,.,.,,.. ., .,.,,,. 1,272 4.2 Indaral, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,324 .7 

Dimetapp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,225 4,0 Lasix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,291 ,7 

Diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and Vitamin B–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,287 ,7 

pertussis vaccine . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 1,170 3.8 Motrin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,125 .5 

Amoxicillin .,.,.,.....,.,,,,. . . . . . . . . . . 1,095 3.6 Hydrodiuril (hydrochlorothiazide) ., . . 1,026 .3 

Aspirin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995 3.3 Hygroton, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971 .3 

Penicillin. , .,,......,.,...,.. 963 3.2 Ampicillin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 960 .2 

Allergy relief or shots, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 2.7 Penicillin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956 .2 

Reflex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 572 1.9 Hydrochlorothiazide . . . . . . . . . . . 953 1.2 

Erythromycin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 548 1.8 Valium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 677 1.1 

Actifed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 539 1.8 Tagamet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 1,1 

Arhoxil (amoxicillin) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 494 1.6 Thyroid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849 1.1 

E. E. S.(e~thromycin) . .,, ,, .,...... ,., .,,,,. 490 1.6 Tetracycline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 759 1,0 

Benadryl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 484 1.6 Insulin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 754 1.0 

Phenergan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 456 1.5 Prednisone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 732 0.9 

E-mycin (e~thromycin} . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 413 1.4 Diuril . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 686 0.9 

Residual, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,646 57.7 Lanoxin (digoxin) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 677 0.9 

Aldomet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 675 0.9 

15-24 years,.,.........,,,,.. 29,989 100.0 Indocin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 633 0.8 

Penicillin, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Ampicillin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

. . . . . . 1,501 

1,189 

5.0 

4.0 

Lopressor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Clinoril . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

543 

485 

0.7 

0.6 

Premarin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485 0.6 Aspirin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 646 2,2 

Tetracycline . .,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 539 1,8 Aspirin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477 0.6 

Tranxene, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 468 0.6 

Ilargyrelief or shots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400 1.3 Diabinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465 0.6 

nadryl ..,.......,.,,,,,.. *364 1.2 8enadryl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454 0.6 

,energan expectorant with codeina ’340 1.1 Butazolidin Alka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453 0.6 

r {etanus toxoid .,, , .,.,..... . . . . . . . . . . . “340 1.1 Allergy relief or shots, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429 0.6 

Pramet FA. , .,.....,,,,,,,,,.. . . . . . . . . . *323 1.1 Aidoril .,.,.,..............,., . . . . . . . . . 429 0.6 

Residual .,,,,,,,,.,.,....,,.. 23,665 79,6 Phenobarbital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

E. E. S.(erythromycin) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

421 

420 

0.5 

0.5 

25–44 years.,..,,,........,,. 68,195 100,0 Darvocet-N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Ativan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

419 

408 

0.5 

0.5 

Penicillin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,868 2.7 8rethine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406 0.5 

Ampicillin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,395 2,0 Ser-ap-es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405 0.5 

Lasix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,327 1.9 Erythromycin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402 0.5 

Tetracycline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,216 .8 Residual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,843 66.1 

Chorionic gonadotropin .,.,.... 1,095 .6 

Aspirin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,018 .5 

Vitamin B–l Z,.............,,.. 845 .2 

Allergy relief or shots, . . . . . . . . . 837 .2 65 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73,270 100.0 

Actifed, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 785 .2 Lanoxin (digoxin) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,553 3.5 

Valium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 755 .1 Lasix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,183 3.0 

Ionamin (phentermine), .,.,..... 730 ,1 Vitamin B-12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,723 2.4 

Hydrochlorothiazide ..,.,.,.,.. . . . . . . . . . 674 1.0 Dyazide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1<723 2.4 

Tagamet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 654 1.0 Inderal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 593 2,2 

Phenergan expectorant with codeine . . 607 0,9 Aldomet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,261 1.7 

Erythromycin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 588 0.9 Dioxin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,168 1.6 

Reflex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 583 0.9 Motrgn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,059 1,4 

Thyroid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579 0.8 Diabinese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972 1.3 

Fastin(phentermine) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 532 0.8 Insulin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963 1.3 

Motnn. . ., ., ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 504 0.7 Hydrodiuril (hydrochlorothiazide). 919 1.3 

Amoxil(amoxicillin) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 488 0.7 Hygroton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886 1.2 

Phenergan ...,,,,,.....,,.,.. 486 0.7 Tagamet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 790 1.1 

Inderal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 476 0.7 Aspirin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 779 1.1 

Decadron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 468 0.7 Aldoril . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 778 1.1 

Phentermina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 463 0.7 Valium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 772 1.1 

Tylenol with codeine . . . . . . . . . 448 0,7 Influenza virus vaccine, type A,8. 734 1.0 

Tylenol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443 0.7 Nitroglycerin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 654 0.9 

rvocet-N, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 438 0.6 Slow- K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 650 0.9 

I S.(erythromycin) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 434 0,6 Isordil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 639 0.9 

Actifed ., ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482 1,6 

.rramycin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428 0.6 Antivert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 622 0.8 

Tranxene. ,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 411 0.6 Tetracycline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 616 0.8 

Residual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46,620 68.4 Clinoril . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 605 0,8 

See footnote st end of tsble. 
12 admncedata 

Table 7. Number and percent distribution of drug mentions in ofhce visits to general and family practitioners by age of patient and most frequently named drugs 

United States, 1980—Con. 

Number of Number of 

Age of patient mentions Percent Age of patient mentions Percent _ 

and name of drugl in distribution and name of drug~ in distribution 

thousands thousands 

65 yeara and over—Con. 65 years and over—Con. 

Hydrochlorothiazide, .,.,.,.,., . . . . . . . . . 596 0.8 Lopressor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469 0.6 

Penicillin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 542 0.7 Indocin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 0.6 

Dalmane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 522 0.7 Darvocet-N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449 0.6 

Orinaae, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 501 0.7 Naprosyn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 440 0.6 

Nitro-bid (nitroglycerin). . . . . . . ., . . . ., ., ., 485 0.7 Residual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44,171 60.2 

1~a~ad on ~ha phy~i~i~n,~ entry on the Patient Record form. 

Table 8. Number and percent distribution of drug mentions in office visits to internists by most frequently named drugs: United States, 1980 

Number of Percent Name of drugl mentions distribution in thousands 

All drug mentions. , ., ., .,.,.,.,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118,943 100.0 
aclmncedata 13 

Table 9. Number and percent distribution of drug mentions in office visits to pediatricians by most frequently named drugs: United States, 1980 

Number of 

Percent Name of drugl mentions 

@ in thousands distribution 

All drug mentions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72,825 100.0 

Poliomyelitis vaccine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,829 6.6 

Diphtheria andtetanus toxoids and pertussis vaccine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,564 6.3 

Tuberculin tine test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,409 4.7 

Anmxicillin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,146 4.3 

Allergy relief orshots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,991 4.1 

Penicillin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,252 3.1 

Dimetapp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,858 2.6 

Amoxil(amoxicillin) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,538 2.1 

Ampicillin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,527 2.1 

E.E.S.(etythromycin) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,440 2.0 

Aspirin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,236 1.7 

Dirnetane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,078 1.5 

Bicillin (penicillin) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977 1.3 

Phenergan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 1.2 

Lerotid (amoxicillin) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 1.2 

Actifed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809 1.1 

Vaccination (undetermined) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 795 1.1 

V-Cillin (penicillin) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 794 1.1 

Novahistine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 789 1.1 

Erythromycin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 753 1.0 

M-M-R (measles, mumps, rubella virus vaccine) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 735 1,0 

Diphtheria, tetanus toxoids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 735 1.0 

Tylenol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 703 1.0 

Phenergan expectorant with codeine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 656 0.9 

Rondec . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 654 0.9 

Septra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 632 0.9 

Vkemin B-12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 618 0.8 

Iosone(erythromycin) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 593 0.8 

riaminic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 591 0.8 

e Benadrvl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 575 0.8 

Residual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,799 40.9 

1&~ed on the physicians entry on the patient Record ‘em. 

Table 10. Number and percent distribution of drug mentions in office visits to obstetrician-gynecologists by most frequently named drugs United States, 1980 

Number of 

Name of drugl mentions Percent 

distribution in thousands 

All drug mentions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,026 100.0 

Prenatel formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,621 4.9 

Ortho-novum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,254 3.8 

Moniatat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,236 3.7 

Pmmarin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,215 3.7 

Matema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,116 3.4 

Lofovral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936 2.8 

Ampicillin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 780 2.4 

Wtimins (unspecified) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 729 2.2 

Stuartnatall+l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 680 2.1 

Flagyl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 649 2.0 

Tetracycline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 587 1.8 

Ovral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 550 1.7 

Nateiins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521 1.6 

emulen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 507 1.5 

o Sultrin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 506 1.5 

Norinyl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459 1.4 

Residual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,680 59.5 

1~a~ed on the phyaician,sentry on the patient R*ord form. 
14 achancedata 

Technical notes 

Source of data and sample design 

The information presented in this report is based on 

data collected by the National Center for Health 

Statistics through its National Ambulatory Medical 

Care Survey (NAMCS) during 1980. The target universe of NAMCS includes oftlce visits made within the 

coterrninous United States by ambulatory patients to 

nonfederally employed physicians who are principally 

engaged in office practice, but not in the specialties of 

anesthesiology, pathology, or radiology. Telephone 

contacts and nonoftlce visits’ are excluded. 

NAMCS utilizes a multistage probability sample 

design that involves samples of primary sampling units 

(PSU’S), physicians’ practices within PSU’S, and patient visits within physician practices. For 1980 a 

sample of 2,959 non-Federal, office-based physicians 

was selected from master files maintained by the 

American Medical Association and the American 

Osteopathic Association. The physician response rate 

for 1980 was 77.2 percent. Sampled physicians were 

asked to complete Patient Records (figure 1) for a systematic random sample of ofilce visits taking place 

during a randomly assigned weekly reporting period. 

During 1980, responding physicians completed 46,081 

Patient Records, on which they recorded 51,372 drug 

mentions. Characteristics of the physician’s practice, 

such as primary specialty and type of practice, were obtained during an induction interview. The National 

Opinion Research Center, under contract to the National 

Center for Health Statistics, was responsible for the 

survey’s field operations. 

For a more detailed discussion of the limitations, 

qualifications, and definitions of the data collected in 

the NAMCS, see Vital and Health Statistics, Series 

13. No. 66.’2 

Estimates presented in this report differ from the 

estimates reported in the National Medical Care Utilization and Expenditure Survey (NMCUES), another 

program of the National Center for Health Statistics 

(NCHS). The variation in estimates is due to differences 

in survey populations, data collection methodology, 

and definitions. The NMCUES, cosponsored by NCHS 

and the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA), 

is a national panel survey of households in which 

information on visits to physicians’ ofilces and hospital 

outpatient departments was collected. Preliminary survey data as well as a discussion of the survey methodology are forthcoming from NCHS and HCFA. 

Sampling errors and rounding of numbers 

The standard error is primarily a measure of the 

sampling variability that occurs by chance because 

NOTE: A list of references follows the text. 

. 

only a sample, rather than the entire universe, is surve~ed. The-relative standard error of an estimate is obtained by dividing the standard error by the estimate itself and is expressed as a percent of the estimate. 

Relative standard errors of selected aggregate visit statistics are shown in table L Standard errors for estimated 

percents of visits are shown in table II. Similar standard 

errors for drug statistics and percents are shown in tables III and IV. Tables I and II should be used to obtain 

the standard error of a specific drug mention (e.g., Dyazide). Tables III and IV should be used to obtain the 

standard error of a group of drug mentions (e.g., all drugs 

prescribed for hypertension). 

Estimates of office visits have been rounded to the 

nearest thousand. For this reason detailed figures 

within tables do not always add to totals. Rates and percents were calculated on the basis of original, unrounded 

figures and will not necessarily agree precisely with 

percents calculated from rounded data. 

Definitions 

An ambulatoiypatient is an individual presenting 

himself for personal health services who is neithe 

bedridden nor currently admitted to any health c 

institution on the premises. * 

Aphysician eligiblefor NAikfCS is a duly licensed 

doctor of medicine (M.D.) or doctor of osteopathy 

(D. O.) currently in office-based practice who spends 

time in caring for ambulatory patients. Excluded from 

NAMCS are physicians who are hospital based; physicians who specialize in anesthesiology, pathology, or 

radiology; physicians who are federally employed; physicians who treat only institutionalized patients; physicians employed full time by an institution, and physicians 

who spend no time seeing ambulatory ,patients. 

An ojj$ce is a place that the physician identities as a 

Table 1. Approximate relative standard errora of ektimated number of office visits 

baaed on all physician specialties NAMCS, 1980 

Relative 

Estimated number of office visits standard 

in thousands error in 

Dercent 

5C43 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27.3 

1,000. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.5 

2,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.1 

5.000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4 

10,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.3 

20,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.9 

50,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.9 ● 

100,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5 

550,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 

Exsmp/eof use of rsb/e:An aggregata estimste of 75,000,000 visits hss a ralative standard 

error of 4.7 percent, or a standard emor of 3,525,000 viaita (4.7 percent of 75,000,000). 
15

Table Il. Approximate standard errors of percents of estimated numbers of office visits based on all physician specialties NAMCS, 1980

●

☛

Base of percent Estimated percent

(number of office visits in thousands)

1 or99 i or95 100r90 20 or 80 30 or 70 50

Standard error in percent

500 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.7 5.9 8.1 10.8 12.4 13.5

1,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.9 4.2 5.7 7.6 8.7 9.5

2,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 2.9 4.0 5.4 6.2 6.7

5,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.8 1.9 2.6 3.4 3.9 4.3

10,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.6 1.3 1.8 2.4 2.8 3.0

20,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.4 0.9 1.3 1.7 2.0 2.1

50,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.3 0.6 0.8 1.1 1.2 1.3

100,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.9 ‘1.0

500,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4

Exampleof useoftable: An estimate of30 percentbasedonanaggregateof 15,000,000viaits hasastandarderrorof2.4 percent, ora relativestandarderrorof8 percent[2.4 percent + 30

percent].

Table Ill. Approximate relative standard errors of estimated number of drug

mentions based on all physician specialties NAMCS, 1980

Relative

Estimated number of drug mentions standard

in thousands error in

percent

I,ooo............................................... 27.3

2,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :9.7

5,m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.2

10,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

e

10.1

,ooo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2

,ooo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.8

Ico,ooo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2

3m,m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.8

650,W . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.7

Examp/eof usa oftable:An aggregate est!mate of 75,000,000 drug mentions has a ra!ative

standard error of 6.5 Dercent or a standard error of 4.875.OGU mentions [6.5 oercent of

75,CKKuxKr). ‘

. .

location for his ambulatory practice. Responsibility

over tnne for patient care and professional services rendered there generalIy resides with the individual physician rather than an institution.

A visit is a direct personal exchange between an

ambulatory patient and a physician or a staff member

working under the physician’s supervision, for the purpose of seeking care and rendering health services.

Adrugmention is the physician’s entry of apharmaceutical agent ordered or provided—by any route of

administration-for prevention, diagnosis, or treatment.

Generic as well as brand-name drugs are included, as

are nonprescription as well as prescription drugs. Along

with all new drugs, the physician also records continued

medications if the patient was specifically instructed

during the visit to continue the medication.

Table IV. Approximate standard errors of percents of estimated numbers of drug mentions based on all physician specialties: NAMCS, 1980

Base of percent

Estimated percent

(number of drug mentions in thousands)

? or99 5 or 95 100r90 20 or80 30 or 70 50

Standard error in percentage points

1,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.7 5.8 8.0 10.7 12.2 13.3

2)000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.9 4.1 5.7 7.6 8.7 9.4

5,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...<... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 2.6 3.6 4.8 5.5 6.0

20,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.6 1.3 1.8 2.4 2.7 3.0

100,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.3 0.6 0.8 1.1 1.2 1.3

‘600,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5

Example of useoftable:An estimate of 30 percent based on an aggregate of 12,500,000 drug mentions has a standard error of4.1 percent ora relative standard error of 13.7 percent (4.1

percent + 30 percent).
16 advancedata

---

. . .

0.0

z

*

#

Data not available

Category not applicable

Quantity zero

Quantity more than zero but less than

0.05

Quantity more than zero but less than 500

where numbers are rounded to thousands

Figure does not meet standards of

reliability or precision

Figure suppressed to comply with

confidentiality requirements

Recent Issues of Advance Data From Vital and Health Statistics

No. 85. Summary Data From the National Inventory of Phar- No. 82. Contraceptive Use Patterns, Prior Source, and Pregnancy

macists: United States, 1978–79 (Issued: October 8, 1982) History of Female Family Planning Patients: United States, 1980

No. 84. Blood Pressure Levels and Hypertension in Persons Ages (Issued June 16, 1982)

6–74 Years: United States, 1976–80 (Issued: October 8. 1982) No. 81. Drug Utilization in Office Practice by Age and Sex of the

No. 83. Deliveries in Short-Stay Hospitals: United States, 1980 Patient Na~onal Ambulatory Medical C&e ‘Survey, United

(Issued: October 8, 1982) States, 1980 (Issued July 26, 1982)

m

SUGGESTED CITATION

National Center for Health Statistics, B. K. Cvrxess:

Drug utilization in office visits to primary care

physicians: National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

1980.Advance Data From Vital and Health Statistics,

No. 86. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS) 82-1250. Public This report may be reprinted without further

Health Service, Hyattsville, Md. October 8, 1982 permission.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

AND HUMAN SERVICES

Public Health Service

National Center for Health Statistics

3700 East-West Highway

Hyattsville, Maryland 20782

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HHS

HHS 396

THIRD CLASS

BULK RATE C*

.

U.S.MAIL

To receive this publication regularly, contact the

National Center for Health Statistics by calling

301-436-NCHS

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 82-1250