ArticleThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene2022
Assessment of the Quality of Injectable Antibiotics in Benin.
Article in The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Substandard and falsified medicines are an enormous threat to global health. Poor quality antibiotic preparations contribute to the development of antimicrobial resistance. In surgery, where the occurrence of healthcare-associated infections is high, healthcare teams need to rely on the quality of antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent infections. We assessed the quality of antibiotics used for surgical infection prophylaxis in Benin. Thirty-three samples were collected from six hospitals located in various departments in Benin. The antibiotics (powders for injection: amoxicillin + clavulanic acid, ampicillin, ceftriaxone; solutions for injection: ciprofloxacin, gentamicin, metronidazole) were assessed using visual inspection, pharmacotechnical tests (including uniformity of mass, pH measure, sterility test, and active pharmaceutical ingredient identification), and assay tests (including a simple analytical method thin layer chromatography) and complex analytical techniques (ultraviolet-visible spectrophotometry, high-performance liquid chromatography-diode-array detection, conductometry). Because the material needed for the methods recommended by the pharmacopeias to assess the dosage of gentamicin was not available, we developed and validated a conductometry method. Results showed that 97% (n = 32) of the samples passed visual inspection; 100% (n = 33) of the samples passed the pharmacotechnical tests, identification of active ingredients, and sterility test; 88% (n = 29) passed the test for percentage of active pharmaceutical ingredients. Overall, 15% of the samples did not pass the quality test (3% on visual inspection and 12% for excess active ingredients). Although most of the samples passed the quality tests, it appears important to perform routine quality control for intravenous medicines.
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.