ReviewJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2026
Pharmacy inventory management practices and constraints in Asia-Pacific hospitals: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis.
Review in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Persistent medicine shortages across the Asia-Pacific region suggest variability in hospital inventory management capacity. Despite available guidelines, variations exist across hospitals in adopting recommended inventory management practices. Thus, this study aimed to identify existing inventory management methods, evaluate related challenges, and highlight recommendations for improvement. Methods: Searches were performed to identify relevant sources from 39 countries on CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Business Source Complete, and Emerald Insight. Non-indexed literature was retrieved through Google Scholar and general Google searches. Backward and forward citation searching was conducted. Data were extracted based on an initial framework comprising three components: planning and procurement, storage and stock management, and staff management. The framework was later expanded through inductive coding to include 12 subcomponents. Findings were narratively synthesised to describe inventory management methods and their impact on medicine supply. Methodological quality of the included empirical publications was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Results: Seventy-two publications from 20 countries were included. Practices varied between hospitals even within the same country. Hospitals shared common inventory management challenges that weakened medicine supply systems. A conceptual framework was developed to outline three key themes: systemic constraints, infrastructural limitations, and staff skill gaps. Overcoming systemic constraints requires streamlining expenditure and enhancing central distribution systems. Implementing multi-supplier contracts may be effective at stabilising supply. Infrastructural improvements in storage space and inventory tracking systems may bolster medicine availability. Addressing staff skill gaps requires significant investment in training programmes to strengthen adherence to effective inventory management methods. Conclusion: This study mapped key determinants of medicine availability in hospitals, providing guidance on priority areas for intervention to policymakers, hospital leadership, and inventory personnel. Securing medicine supplies in hospitals requires practical inventory management guidelines that account for systemic constraints and infrastructural limitations while empowering staff to optimise pharmacy inventory management practices.
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.