The use of generic versus brand names in (clinical) pharmacology education across Europe: a cross-sectional survey

Purpose: In pharmacology and clinical pharmacology (P&CP) teaching, using generic names of medicines contributes to global comprehensibility. However, brand names are often used in routine clinical practice, which may pose a challenge in the educational setting. This study aimed to explore P&CP teachers’ use of and attitudes towards generic and brand names in undergraduate education, as well as national prescription regulations. Methods: A survey was conducted with P&CP teachers from 38 European countries. An electronic questionnaire was used to collect data on the participants’ profiles, the nomenclature used and preferred in undergraduate education, and prescribing practices. The latter were then verified with national regulatory authorities. Results: Sixty-one teachers from 23 countries participated in the study, the majority being physicians (n = 47). In total, 13 (21%) teachers use only generic names in their teaching, while 46 (75%) use both generic and brand names. Thirty-four (56%) teachers preferred listing brand names in case-based teaching, as this reflects real life. Conversely, 37 (61%) teachers stated that students should not be exposed to brand names before graduation. Generic prescribing is either allowed or mandatory in all participating countries except two, where brand-name prescribing is mandatory. Conclusion: This study shows that generic names must remain fundamental in P&CP education, but brand names also play a role, especially in case-based education, reflecting real-life practice. Potential implications of generic and brand prescribing for internationalisation in education could be worth further attention.