Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34906236›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2021

Evaluating the implementation of the standard treatment guidelines (STGs) and essential medicines list (EML) at a public South African tertiary institution and its associated primary health care (PHC) facilities.

Tashni Govender, Fatima Suleman, Velisha Ann Perumal-Pillay

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Development of practical emergency simulation training in primary health care: Lessons learnt.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tashni GovenderDiscipline of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Private Bag X54001, Durban, 4000, South Africa.
Fatima SulemanDiscipline of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Private Bag X54001, Durban, 4000, South Africa.
Velisha Ann Perumal-PillayDiscipline of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Private Bag X54001, Durban, 4000, South Africa. perumalv@ukzn.ac.za.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4767-4139
University of KwaZulu-Natal · ZA

Funding

Developing Research Innovation, Localization and Leadership in South Africa (DRILL)D43TW010131 · FIC · UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL · PI BRYSIEWICZ, PETRA, MOSHABELA, MOSA · 2015 to 2019
$3.2M
FIC NIH HHS D43 TW010131NIH HHS D43TW010131
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe standard treatment guidelines (STGs) and essential medicines list (EML) were a policy option recommended in the National Drug Policy for South Africa in 1996 to address the irrational and bloated medicines procurement list. STGs/EML serve as a tool to promote cost-effective use of medicines; rational prescribing; and improve accessibility to medicines for all citizens. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use and implementation of the STGs/EML by prescribers at a public tertiary institution and its associated Primary Health Care (PHC) facilities in the uMhlathuze subdistrict of KwaZulu Natal. The study aimed to provide feedback and to make recommendations to policy makers to improve the use and implementation of the STGs/EML and to inform National Health Insurance (NHI) policy development.

methodAn observational quantitative descriptive research design was used. A retrospective audit of prescriptions was conducted, and questionnaires were utilized to collect data from prescribers and the facilities to evaluate the utilization of the STGs/EML and the rational use of medicines. All descriptive analyses were presented as counts with percentages, and Fisher's exact test was used to compare results. The data was summarized, reduced, and analysed using SAS statistics software.

results107 medical doctors (97%) responded to the questionnaire at hospital level and 98 nurses (98%) responded to the questionnaire at the PHC level. Results revealed that the majority of doctors, 94.4%, had access to the latest STGs/EML compared with only 41.8% of nurses. 70.3% and 78.3% of doctor's and nurse's prescriptions, respectively, adhered to the guidelines. 94.9% of nurses requested training on the use of STGs/EML as most of them had not received formal training on its use.

conclusionThis study showed suboptimal adherence to STGs/EML by all prescribers, in contrast to previous research amongst nurses when hardcopies were available. Training on the use of the STGs/EML is needed at PHC level and improved monitoring of STGs/EML compliance is necessary. This study may be replicated for a wider population to paint a national picture and to periodically assess the extent of the implementation of the STGs/EML.

Indexed as

Essential medicines listPrimary and tertiary health careRational use of medicinesSouth AfricaStandard treatment guidelines

Identifiers

PMID34906236
PMCPMC8670019
OpenAlexW4200603308

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.