Increased utilisation of PEPFAR-supported laboratory services by non-HIV patients in Tanzania

Background: It is unknown to what extent the non-HIV population utilises laboratories supported by the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). Objectives: We aimed to describe the number and proportion of laboratory tests performed in 2009 and 2011 for patients referred from HIV and non-HIV services (NHSs )in a convenience sample collected from 127 laboratories supported by PEPFAR in Tanzania. We then compared changes in the proportions of tests performed for patients referred from NHSs in 2009 vs 2011. Methods: Haematology, chemistry, tuberculosis and syphilis test data were collected from available laboratory registers. Referral sources, including HIV services, NHSs, or lack of a documented referral source, were recorded. A generalised linear mixed model reported the odds that a test was from a NHS. Results: A total of 94 132 tests from 94 laboratories in 2009 and 157 343 tests from 101 laboratories in 2011 were recorded. Half of all tests lacked a documented referral source. Tests from NHSs constituted 42% (66 084) of all tests in 2011, compared with 31% (29 181) in 2009. A test in 2011 was twice as likely to have been referred from a NHS as in 2009 (adjusted odds ratio: 2.0 [95% confidence interval: 2.0–2.1]). Conclusion: Between 2009 and 2011, the number and proportion of tests from NHSs increased across all types of test. This finding may reflect increased documentation of NHS referrals or that the laboratory scale-up originally intended to service the HIV-positive population in Tanzania may be associated with a ‘spillover effect’ amongst the general population

Availability and affordability of blood pressure-lowering medicines and the effect on blood pressure control in high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries: an analysis of the PURE study data

Background: Hypertension is considered the most important risk factor for cardiovascular diseases, but its control is poor worldwide. We aimed to assess the availability and affordability of blood pressure-lowering medicines, and the association with use of these medicines and blood pressure control in countries at varying levels of economic development. Methods: We analysed the availability, costs, and affordability of blood pressure-lowering medicines with data recorded from 626 communities in 20 countries participating in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiological (PURE) study. Medicines were considered available if they were present in the local pharmacy when surveyed, and affordable if their combined cost was less than 20% of the households' capacity to pay. We related information about availability and affordability to use of these medicines and blood pressure control with multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression models, and compared results for high-income, upper-middle-income, lower-middle-income, and low-income countries. Data for India are presented separately because it has a large generic pharmaceutical industry and a higher availability of medicines than other countries at the same economic level. Findings: The availability of two or more classes of blood pressure-lowering drugs was lower in low-income and middle-income countries (except for India) than in high-income countries. The proportion of communities with four drug classes available was 94% in high-income countries (108 of 115 communities), 76% in India (68 of 90), 71% in upper-middle-income countries (90 of 126), 47% in lower-middle-income countries (107 of 227), and 13% in low-income countries (nine of 68). The proportion of households unable to afford two blood pressure-lowering medicines was 31% in low-income countries (1069 of 3479 households), 9% in middle-income countries (5602 of 65 471), and less than 1% in high-income countries (44 of 10 880). Participants with known hypertension in communities that had all four drug classes available were more likely to use at least one blood pressure-lowering medicine (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2·23, 95% CI 1·59–3·12); p<0·0001), combination therapy (1·53, 1·13–2·07; p=0·054), and have their blood pressure controlled (2·06, 1·69–2·50; p<0·0001) than were those in communities where blood pressure-lowering medicines were not available. Participants with known hypertension from households able to afford four blood pressure-lowering drug classes were more likely to use at least one blood pressure-lowering medicine (adjusted OR 1·42, 95% CI 1·25–1·62; p<0·0001), combination therapy (1·26, 1·08–1·47; p=0·0038), and have their blood pressure controlled (1·13, 1·00–1·28; p=0·0562) than were those unable to afford the medicines. Interpretation: A large proportion of communities in low-income and middle-income countries do not have access to more than one blood pressure-lowering medicine and, when available, they are often not affordable. These factors are associated with poor blood pressure control. Ensuring access to affordable blood pressure-lowering medicines is essential for control of hypertension in low-income and middle-income countries. Funding: Population Health Research Institute, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario, Canadian Institutes of Health Research Strategy for Patient Oriented Research through the Ontario SPOR Support Unit, the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, pharmaceutical companies (with major contributions from AstraZeneca [Canada], Sanofi Aventis [France and Canada], Boehringer Ingelheim [Germany amd Canada], Servier, and GlaxoSmithKline), Novartis and King Pharma, and national or local organisations in participating countries