ArticleBMJ global health2018
Pharmaceutical quality assurance of local private distributors: a secondary analysis in 13 low-income and middle-income countries.
Article in BMJ global health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- A random survey of the prevalence of falsified and substandard antibiotics in the Lao PDR.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2022Article
- Burden of and factors associated with poor quality antibiotic, antimalarial, antihypertensive and antidiabetic medicines in Malawi.PloS one · 2022Article
- Quality assurance systems of pharmaceutical distributors in low-income and middle-income countries: weaknesses and ways forward.BMJ global health · 2020Article
- Peer supervision experiences of drug sellers in a rural district in East-Central Uganda: a qualitative study.Malaria journal · 2020Article
- A survey of nongovernmental organizations on their use of WHO's prequalification programme.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2020Article
- How does performance-based financing affect the availability of essential medicines in Cameroon? A qualitative study.Health policy and planning · 2019Article
- Poor-quality medical products: social and ethical issues in accessing 'quality' in global health.BMJ global health · 2019Article
- Identifying market risk for substandard and falsified medicines: an analytic framework based on qualitative research in China, Indonesia, Turkey and Romania.Wellcome open research · 2019Article
- Quality of medicines in resource-limited settings: need for ethical guidance.Global bioethics = Problemi di bioetica · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe rapid globalisation of the pharmaceutical production and distribution has not been supported by harmonisation of regulatory systems worldwide. Thus, the supply systems in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) remain exposed to the risk of poor-quality medicines. To contribute to estimating this risk in the private sector in LMICs, we assessed the quality assurance system of a convenient sample of local private pharmaceutical distributors.
methodsThis descriptive study uses secondary data derived from the audits conducted by the QUAMED group at 60 local private pharmaceutical distributors in 13 LMICs. We assessed the distributors' compliance with good distribution practices (GDP), general quality requirements (GQR) and cold chain management (CCM), based on an evaluation tool inspired by the WHO guidelines 'Model Quality Assurance System (MQAS) for procurement agencies'. Descriptive statistics describe the compliance for the whole sample, for distributors in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) versus those in non-SSA, and for those in low-income countries (LICs) versus middle-income countries (MICs).
resultsLocal private pharmaceutical distributors in our sample were non-compliant, very low-compliant or low-compliant for GQR (70%), GDP (60%) and CCM (41%). Only 7/60 showed good to full compliance for at least two criteria. Observed compliance varies by geographical region and by income group: maximum values are higher in non-SSA versus SSA and in MICs versus LICs, while minimum values are the same across different groups.
conclusionThe poor compliance with WHO quality standards observed in our sample indicates a concrete risk that patients in LMICs are exposed to poor-quality or degraded medicines. Significant investments are needed to strengthen the regulatory supervision, including on private pharmaceutical distributors. An adapted standardised evaluation tool inspired by the WHO MQAS would be helpful for self-evaluation, audit and inspection purposes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.