Dataset Information

Availability of Access, Watch, and Reserve groups of essential antibiotics: a cross-sectional survey.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Lower-middle income countries face drastic challenges in Access to essential medicines. Data regarding Pakistan is scarce with no comprehensive study in this regard. The objectives of the study are to document and compare public and private sector availability of all essential antibiotics as well as to conduct a comparison among the AWaRe groups.

Methods

The study analyzed 103 essential antibiotics comprising 51 Access, 29 Watch, 6 Reserve, and 17 anti-tuberculosis drugs from 15^th August to 10^th September 2020 in Lahore, Pakistan. It included on-spot physical availability and availability trend surveys. The survey sites included five public tertiary care hospitals with one as anchor and four randomly selected. Their hospital pharmacies and one randomly selected private retail pharmacy from the vicinity each hospital comprised the ten sampling sites. Percentage availability for each antibiotic was categorized as high (>80%), fairly high (50-80%), low (30-<50%), very low (<30->0%), and not available (0%).

Results

The mean percentage on-spot availability was 23.76% ± 5.19 (14-25%) for public facilities and 59.20% ± 4.45 (54-66%) for private sector retail pharmacies. The overall percentage of available essential antibiotics varied significantly (p** < 0.001) in public and private sector sampling sites. Except for the Watch group, all other groups showed the mode of 0% availability. A significant difference (p**** < 0.00001) was seen in percentage availability by Access, Watch, Reserve, and anti-TB-all groups of essential antibiotics. The availability trend survey revealed a list of 18 medicines as 'as never been available', and five medicines were 'not available for 5 years or more than 5 years.' Fourteen medicines as 'never been heard.'

Conclusion

Non-availability of essential medicines is a significant public health challenge at public-sector facilities in Pakistan. It was observed that a number of essential antibiotics were not available in both public and private sectors. A number of corrective strategies are required. This includes the engagement of stakeholder and government bodies. This can help to improve supply chain barriers.

SUBMITTER: Rafi S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10794303 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Availability of Access, Watch, and Reserve groups of essential antibiotics: a cross-sectional survey.

Rafi Sunaina S Anjum Syed Muneeb SM Usman Muhammad M Nawaz Hafiz Awais HA Chaudhry Mamoona M Babar Zaheer-Ud-Din ZU Rasheed Huma H

Frontiers in public health 20240104

<h4>Background</h4>Lower-middle income countries face drastic challenges in Access to essential medicines. Data regarding Pakistan is scarce with no comprehensive study in this regard. The objectives of the study are to document and compare public and private sector availability of all essential antibiotics as well as to conduct a comparison among the AWaRe groups.<h4>Methods</h4>The study analyzed 103 essential antibiotics comprising 51 Access, 29 Watch, 6 Reserve, and 17 anti-tuberculosis drug ...[more]

PMID: 38239798

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAntimicrobial stewardship (AMS) aims to improve antibiotic use while reducing resistance and its consequences. There is a paucity of data on the availability of AMS programmes in southern Nigeria. Further, there is no data on Nigerian healthcare professionals' knowledge of the WHO 'Access, Watch and Reserve' (AWaRe) classification of antibiotics. This study sought to assess knowledge of AMS and the AWaRe classification of antibiotics among frontline healthcare professionals in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional survey of 417 healthcare professionals, comprising medical doctors, pharmacists and nurses, across 17 public hospitals in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. A paper-based self-completion questionnaire was used to collect data from the participants during working hours between September and November 2023. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS version 25.0, with p < 0.05 indicating statistical significance.ResultsFour hundred and seventeen out of the 500 healthcare professionals approached agreed to participate, giving an 83.4% response rate. Most of the participants were female (62.1%) and nurses (46.3%). Approximately 57% of participants were familiar with the term antibiotic/antimicrobial stewardship, however, only 46.5% selected the correct description of AMS. Majority (53.0%) did not know if AMS programme was available in their hospitals. 79% of participants did not know about AWaRe classification of antibiotics. Among the 87 (20.9%) who knew, 28.7% correctly identified antibiotics into the AWaRe groups from a given list. Only profession significantly predicted knowledge of AMS and awareness of the AWaRe classification of antibiotics (p < 0.001). Pharmacists were more likely to define AMS correctly than medical doctors (odds ratio [OR] = 2.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.16-3.52, p = 0.012), whereas nurses were less likely to be aware of the WHO AWaRe classification of antibiotics than medical doctors (OR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.18-0.72, p = 0.004).ConclusionsThere was a notable knowledge deficit in both AMS and the AWaRe classification of antibiotics among participants in this study. This highlights the need for educational interventions targeted at the different cadres of healthcare professionals on the role of AMS programmes in reducing antimicrobial resistance and its consequences.

Project description:Background: Diabetes is among the top ten most prevalent diseases in Pakistan, and the availability of medicines to treat the disease is vital for a great percentage of the country's population. Insulin was discovered a century ago; however, its access in several parts of the globe remains an issue. This study aims to evaluate prices, availability, and affordability (access components) of insulin and five comparator medicine access in Pakistan. Methods: A nationwide cross-sectional survey was conducted to evaluate the access to insulin and some comparator medicines in eight cities of Pakistan, using a modified WHO/HAI methodology. The survey included 80 medicine outlets, i.e., 40 private pharmacies and 40 public hospitals. Data for every unique insulin product available in the Pakistani market were obtained, including five comparator medicines. Percentage availability, median unit prices (MUPs), and affordability (the number of days' wages (NDWs) required for a month's course by the lowest-paid unskilled government worker) of all products were calculated, including originator brands (OBs) and biosimilar (BS) products. Results: Of all insulin products surveyed (n = 320), 87.5% were manufactured by foreign multinational companies (MNCs). None of the insulin products had an ideal availability of 80% in any of the surveyed health facilities. In the public sector, none of the insulin products had an availability of more than 50%. In the public sector, the overall availability of human insulin was 70% (including OB and BS). While in the private sector, the overall availability of human insulin was 90% and that of analog insulin was 62.5%. The analog insulin products were 72.8% costlier than the human insulin products. The median prices of BS insulin were 25.4% lower than the OB products, indicating that almost one-fourth of the cost could be saved by switching to BS human insulin from OB human insulin. All oral anti-diabetic medicines were found to be affordable, whereas none of the insulin was affordable. The NDWs for human and analog insulin were 1.38 and 5.06. Conclusion: In Pakistan, the insulin availability falls short of the WHO's benchmark of 80%. Insulin continues to be unaffordable in both private and government sectors. To increase insulin access, the government should optimize insulin procurement at all levels, promote local production, enforce biosimilar prescribing, and provide financial subsidies for these products.

Project description:BackgroundThe WHO Essential Medicines List (EML) identifies priority medicines that are most important to public health. Over time, the EML has included an increasing number of cancer medicines. We aimed to investigate whether the cancer medicines in the EML are aligned with the priority medicines of frontline oncologists worldwide, and the extent to which these medicines are accessible in routine clinical practice.MethodsThis international, cross-sectional survey was developed by investigators from a range of clinical practice settings across low-income to high-income countries, including members of the WHO Essential Medicines Cancer Working Group. A 28-question electronic survey was developed and disseminated to a global network of oncologists in 89 countries and regions by use of a hierarchical snowball method; each primary contact distributed the survey through their national and regional oncology associations or personal networks. The survey was open from Oct 15 to Dec 7, 2020. Fully qualified physicians who prescribe systemic anticancer therapy to adults were eligible to participate in the survey. The primary question asked respondents to select the ten cancer medicines that would provide the greatest public health benefit to their country; subsequent questions explored availability and cost of cancer medicines. Descriptive statistics were used to compare access to medicines between low-income and lower-middle-income countries, upper-middle-income countries, and high-income countries.Findings87 country-level contacts and two regional networks were invited to participate in the survey; 46 (52%) accepted the invitation and distributed the survey. 1697 respondents opened the survey link; 423 were excluded as they did not answer the primary study question and 326 were excluded because of ineligibility. 948 eligible oncologists from 82 countries completed the survey (165 [17%] in low-income and lower-middle-income countries, 165 [17%] in upper-middle-income countries, and 618 [65%] in high-income countries). The most commonly selected medicines were doxorubicin (by 499 [53%] of 948 respondents), cisplatin (by 470 [50%]), paclitaxel (by 423 [45%]), pembrolizumab (by 414 [44%]), trastuzumab (by 402 [42%]), carboplatin (by 390 [41%]), and 5-fluorouracil (by 386 [41%]). Of the 20 most frequently selected high-priority cancer medicines, 19 (95%) are currently on the WHO EML; 12 (60%) were cytotoxic agents and 13 (65%) were granted US Food and Drug Administration regulatory approval before 2000. The proportion of respondents indicating universal availability of each top 20 medication was 9-54% in low-income and lower-middle-income countries, 13-90% in upper-middle-income countries, and 68-94% in high-income countries. The risk of catastrophic expenditure (spending >40% of total consumption net of spending on food) was more common in low-income and lower-middle-income countries, with 13-68% of respondents indicating a substantial risk of catastrophic expenditures for each of the top 20 medications in lower-middle-income countries versus 2-41% of respondents in upper-middle-income countries and 0-9% in high-income countries.InterpretationThese data demonstrate major barriers in access to core cancer medicines worldwide. These findings challenge the feasibility of adding additional expensive cancer medicines to the EML. There is an urgent need for global and country-level policy action to ensure patients with cancer globally have access to high priority medicines.FundingNone.

Dataset Information

Availability of Access, Watch, and Reserve groups of essential antibiotics: a cross-sectional survey.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Availability of Access, Watch, and Reserve groups of essential antibiotics: a cross-sectional survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets