Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36601496›Full record

ArticleThe journal of medicine access

Substandard and falsified medical product recalls in Zambia from 2018 to 2021 and implications on the quality surveillance systems.

Billy Chabalenge, Elimas Jere, Namuchindo Nanyangwe, Christabel Hikaambo, Steward Mudenda, Michelo Banda, Aubrey Kalungia, Scott Matafwali

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of medicine access. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors.

Billy ChabalengeDepartment of Medicines Control, Zambia Medicines Regulatory Authority, Lusaka, Zambia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4864-887X
Elimas JereDepartment of Medicines Control, Zambia Medicines Regulatory Authority, Lusaka, Zambia.
Namuchindo NanyangweDepartment of Medicines Control, Zambia Medicines Regulatory Authority, Lusaka, Zambia.
Christabel HikaamboDepartment of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Steward MudendaDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
Michelo BandaDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
Aubrey KalungiaDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia.
Scott MatafwaliDepartment of Clinical Research, Faculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Substandard and falsified (SF) medical products are removed from circulation through a process called 'product recall' by medicines regulatory agencies. In Zambia, the Zambia Medicines Regulatory Authority (ZAMRA) is responsible for recalling SF medical products from the Zambian market through passive and active surveillance methods. This study aimed to describe the prevalence of recalls of SF medical products and to analyse the frequently recalled therapeutic categories, dosage forms, categories of defects that led to the recalls and their sources with respect to the country of the marketing authorisation holder (MAH) or manufacturer. Methods: We conducted a descriptive cross-sectional review of the product recalls issued by ZAMRA between January 2018 and December 2021. A search for all medical product alerts and recalls issued by ZAMRA was carried out by reviewing the internal post-marketing surveillance database kept at ZAMRA headquarters. Data were extracted using a structured Excel database and analysed using Microsoft Excel. Results: A total of 119 alerts were received during the review period, of which 83 (69.7%) were product recalls. Oral solid dosage forms were the most recalled dosage form (53%). Furthermore, the number of recalls increased in 2020 (44.6%) and 2021 (22.9%), with the majority (20.5%) of the recalled products being substandard products classified as antiseptics and disinfectants and were attributed to the high demand during the COVID-19 pandemic. Manufacturing laboratory control issues were the reason for product recall in almost half (47.4%) of the cases. Most of the products recalled originated from India (38.6%), followed by Zambia (25.3%). Only one suspected falsified product was recalled between 2018 and 2021. A total of 66 recalls of the 83 products were initiated by ZAMRA, with only 17 voluntarily by foreign MAHs. No product recall was initiated by the local representatives of foreign manufacturers or MAH. Conclusion: The majority of the pharmaceutical product recalls in Zambia were substandard products. Manufacturing laboratory control issues lead to most recalls and require investigation of the root causes, preventive action, and strict compliance with the good manufacturing practices guidelines by manufacturers.

Indexed as

falsifiedmedical productsPharmacovigilancerecallsubstandardZambiaZAMRA

Identifiers

PMID36601496
PMCPMC9806395

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.