Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35681204›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2022

Post marketing surveillance of selected veterinary medicines in Tanzania mainland.

Adam M Fimbo, Betty A Maganda, Kissa W Mwamwitwa, Itikija E Mwanga, Engelbert B Mbekenga, Seth Kisenge, Sophia A Mziray, Gerald S Kulwa, Yonah H Mwalwisi, Danstan H Shewiyo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Adam M FimboTanzania Medicines and Medical Devices Authority, P.O BOX 77150, Dar es salaam, Tanzania.
Betty A MagandaDepartment of Pharmaceutics and Pharmacy Practice, Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences, P.O BOX 65013, Dar es salaam, Tanzania. bettynjau7@gmail.com.
Kissa W MwamwitwaTanzania Medicines and Medical Devices Authority, P.O BOX 77150, Dar es salaam, Tanzania.
Itikija E MwangaTanzania Medicines and Medical Devices Authority, P.O BOX 77150, Dar es salaam, Tanzania.
Engelbert B MbekengaTanzania Medicines and Medical Devices Authority, P.O BOX 77150, Dar es salaam, Tanzania.
Seth KisengeTanzania Medicines and Medical Devices Authority, P.O BOX 77150, Dar es salaam, Tanzania.
Sophia A MzirayTanzania Medicines and Medical Devices Authority, P.O BOX 77150, Dar es salaam, Tanzania.
Gerald S KulwaTanzania Medicines and Medical Devices Authority, P.O BOX 77150, Dar es salaam, Tanzania.
Yonah H MwalwisiTanzania Medicines and Medical Devices Authority, P.O BOX 77150, Dar es salaam, Tanzania.
Danstan H ShewiyoTanzania Medicines and Medical Devices Authority, P.O BOX 77150, Dar es salaam, Tanzania.
Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences · TZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVeterinary medicines have been widely used for the prevention and treatment of animal diseases. Globally, the veterinary medicine industry is growing. However, there is a significant increase of concern on the quality of veterinary medicines in various developing countries' legal markets. Poor-quality medicines are associated with treatment failure, development of drug resistance, increased healthcare cost, and death. These reasons warrant a need for monitoring the quality of the medicines circulating in the Tanzania Mainland.

methodsThis was a survey study and veterinary medicines samples were collected from 9 out of 26 regions of Tanzania mainland between 2014 and 2017. Veterinary medicines were sampled from wholesale pharmacies, retail pharmacies, veterinary clinics and Veterinary Accredited Drug Dispensing Outlets (ADDO-vet). All sampled medicines were subjected to product information review and full quality control testing at the Tanzania Medicines and Medical Devices Authority-World Health Organization prequalified laboratory.

resultsA total of 238 samples of veterinary medicines were collected. Out of these, 97.1% (231/238) were subjected to full quality control testing and product information review. All sampled veterinary medicines conformed to visual appearance, clarity, pH, solubility and sterility tests. Also, of the sampled veterinary medicines 97.8% (226/231) and 89.2% (206/231) passed identification and assay tests, respectively. As well as, the majority of the collected samples 92% (219/238) failed to comply with product information requirements. The most observed deficiencies on product information were inadequate information on the package insert 94.1% (224/238), inappropriate storage conditions 55.5% (132/238) and lack of Tanzania registration number 27% (64/238).

conclusionVeterinary medicines with poor quality were found circulating in the legal markets of Tanzania. This can potentiate treatment failure and the development of drug resistance in animals and humans. Post marketing surveillance program will continue to be implemented to ensure that only good quality, safe and efficacious medicines are circulating in the Tanzania Mainland market.

Indexed as

MarketingPharmaciesAnimalsDrug IndustryProduct Surveillance, PostmarketingTanzaniaFalsifiedPost-marketing surveillanceProduct Information ReviewScreeningSubstandardVeterinary medicines

Identifiers

PMID35681204
PMCPMC9178830
OpenAlexW4281895333

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.