Prescription Patterns and Documented Clinical Contexts of Three Kampo Medicines in Outpatient Care: A Single‐Center Retrospective Study

Aim To characterize and compare the real‐world prescription patterns of choreito, hachimijiogan, and goshajinkigan in a Japanese university hospital. Methods This retrospective, single‐center observational study included patients who received choreito, hachimijiogan, or goshajinkigan between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2024. The overall departmental distribution of unique patients receiving each formula was examined. In addition, 50 patients per formula (150 in total) were selected in ascending order of medical record number for detailed chart review. The index prescription was defined as the first prescription of the respective formula during the study period. Documented clinical contexts, prescription positioning, and concomitant medications were assessed. Results Overall, 118 patients receiving choreito, 183 receiving hachimijiogan, and 793 receiving goshajinkigan were identified. Urology accounted for 41.5%, 20.2%, and 5.4% of patients receiving each formula, respectively. In the chart review, urinary tract‐related contexts were documented in 88.0% of choreito, 46.0% of hachimijiogan, and 8.0% of goshajinkigan cases. Lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia represented the most frequent context for hachimijiogan (44.0%), whereas peripheral sensory or neuropathic symptoms predominated with goshajinkigan (56.0%). Acute or short‐term use was more frequent with choreito (26.0%) than with hachimijiogan or goshajinkigan (4.0% each). Conclusion The three Kampo formulations showed different patterns of use across clinical departments, documented clinical contexts, and prescription positioning in this single‐center study. These findings provide a descriptive overview of their real‐world use in routine hospital practice.