I think the generic price is still high--it didn't come up in the
ePocrates database, but for patients with insurance, the copay will be
dramatically lower for the generic version vs. all the brand names.

I thought of you yesterday: I went with my husband to the Yankee
Dental conference in Boston, and a rep tried to sell him a 3-D CT
scanner for the office. He showed us the fine cuts and the the ability
to manipulate the image. Now, it's not cost-effective for a dentist
with a small office, and the entire state of RI doesn't have a 3-D CT
scanner--even in the university affiliated hospitals, but watching the
images, I could see how you would get great results using it on your
patients vs. a traditional sinus CT.

I personally had to go to Mass Eye and Ear to get a 3-D sinus CT, and
they charged my insurance many thousands of dollars for it, this was
back in 2000.

Personally, badk to nasal steroids, I prescribe the generic flonase a
lot due to the low copay--even though I personally use the rhinocort.
When I used flonase, I thought it was more effective than the
rhinocort, but my physician wanted to avoid the bz.
Judy

On 1/28/07 7:27 AM, in article
1169998070.808300.10310@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "judy.n"

Where is best place to purchase generic Flonase. I haven't seen a big price
difference in California.

Both have preservatives and alcohol in them: brand name flonase had
"masking perfume": nasonex is now scent free. Hypothetically nasonex
is less bioavailable as a steroid. I used to use flonase, and liked
it, but my allergist prefers rhinocort AQ because it has no
benzylchonium chloride/scent/alcohol.
The generic option is really nice for co-pays.
Judy

I've used them both and find them equally effective. Flonase is out in a
generic form now so if cost/insurance is an issue...

CS

Any opinions??

Mel