ArticleThe Indian journal of medical research2025
Challenges in medicine procurement through GeM in a tertiary care hospital in northeast India.
Article in The Indian journal of medical research, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background & objectives The procurement of medical items (drugs and consumables) through the Government e-marketplace (GeM) is a recent initiative. This study aimed to comprehensively assess the bottlenecks, procedural pitfalls, and delays impacting the supply chain in the procurement process of a tertiary care hospital in northeast India. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on the procurement data obtained from the hospital's procurement cell over 12 months. The study primarily focused on the total demand for medicines and consumables through the e-portal and compared it with the actual quantity/quality received by healthcare facilities. Results The initial demand was placed for 1507 medicines and 1219 medical consumables. However, the healthcare facility received only 695 (46.1%) medicines and 945 (77.5%) consumables. Major bottlenecks identified were non-quotation of medicines, price negotiation rejections, and vendor failure to supply. Interpretation & conclusions This study identifies a few bottlenecks: non-quotation by vendors, price negotiation rejections and failure to supply medicines and consumables by the vendors in procurement through the GeM. Efforts like flexibility in matching previous purchase rates, International Organisation for Standardisation/World Health Organization (ISO/WHO) qualified vendor base at the GeM level and porting in reliable pharmaceutical companies must be directed towards optimising procurement processes and enhancing supply chain management to bridge the identified gaps and promote seamless healthcare delivery.
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.