ArticlePLOS global public health2024
Quality of medicines for Cardio-Vascular Diseases (CVDs) in the Ethiopian border with Kenya: The case of enalapril maleate and furosemide tablet quality in Borena and Gedeo zones.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2024. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hypertension (HTN), a cardiovascular disease (CV), is a major public health challenge. Therefore, the quality of drugs used to treat it has become a major concern. Enalapril and furosemide are among the drugs prescribed to manage hypertension. Hence, this study is aimed at evaluating the quality of different brands of enalapril and furosemide tablets available in the Gedeo and Borena zones, southern Ethiopia. Thirteen generic brands of enalapril maleate (5 mg) and furosemide (40 mg) tablets were evaluated for visual defects, in vitro dissolution test, weight variations, friability, hardness, and disintegration tests. The analysis of active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) content was performed by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Out of 55 samples, 7 (12.73%) failed to comply with the criteria for visual inspection; otherwise, all samples passed the identification test. Except for one brand of each of enalapril maleate and furosemide, all passed the dissolution test. The assay value showed that all enalapril maleate samples were within the limits of United States Pharmacopoeia (USP), 2020. Additionally, except for two batches, all furosemide samples were within the USP and British Pharmacopoeia (BP), 2020 standards. Out of 55 samples, 8% (2/25) and 6.67% (2/30) of enalapril maleate and furosemide tablets failed the uniformity of dosage units test per the USP-2020, respectively. All samples passed the disintegration test, and selected furosemide samples passed the microbial limit tests. However, 36% (9/25) and 20% (6/30) of enalapril maleate and furosemide samples failed to pass hardness test. Generally, from the total samples, 50.91% (28/55) were substandard (did not meet the specifications failing any one or more parameters assessed). The studied drugs circulating in the market did not meet some of the needed quality specifications. This could have brought a risk of reduced efficacy due to the distribution of poor quality medicines in the area.
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.