Prices and availability of locally produced and imported medicines in Ethiopia and Tanzania

Background: To assess the effect of policies supporting local medicine production to improve access to medicines. Methods: We adapted the WHO/HAI instruments measuring medicines availability and prices to differentiate local from imported products, then pilot tested in Ethiopia and Tanzania. In each outlet, prices were recorded for all products in stock for medicines on a country-specific list. Government procurement prices were also collected. Prices were compared to an international reference and expressed as median price ratios (MPR). Results: The Ethiopian government paid more for local products (median MPR = 1.20) than for imports (median MPR = 0.84). Eight of nine medicines procured as both local and imported products were cheaper when imported. Availability was better for local products compared to imports, in the public (48% vs. 19%, respectively) and private (54% vs. 35%, respectively) sectors. Patient prices were lower for imports in the public sector (median MPR = 1.18[imported] vs. 1.44[local]) and higher in the private sector (median MPR = 5.42[imported] vs. 1.85[local]). In the public sector, patients paid 17% and 53% more than the government procurement price for local and imported products, respectively. The Tanzanian government paid less for local products (median MPR = 0.69) than imports (median MPR = 1.34). In the public sector, availability of local and imported products was 21% and 32% respectively, with patients paying slightly more for local products (median MPR = 1.35[imported] vs. 1.44[local]). In the private sector, local products were less available (21%) than imports (70%) but prices were similar (median MPR = 2.29[imported] vs. 2.27[local]). In the public sector, patients paid 135% and 65% more than the government procurement price for local and imported products, respectively. Conclusions: Our results show how local production can affect availability and prices, and how it can be influenced by preferential purchasing and mark-ups in the public sector. Governments need to evaluate the impact of local production policies, and adjust policies to protect patients from paying more for local products.Scopu

Parasites and vectors carry no passport: how to fund cross-border and regional efforts to achieve malaria elimination

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Tremendous progress has been made in the last ten years in reducing morbidity and mortality caused by malaria, in part because of increases in global funding for malaria control and elimination. Today, many countries are striving for malaria elimination. However, a major challenge is the neglect of cross-border and regional initiatives in malaria control and elimination. This paper seeks to better understand Global Fund support for multi-country initiatives.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Documents and proposals were extracted and reviewed from two main sources, the Global Fund website and Aidspan.org. Documents and reports from the Global Fund Technical Review Panel, Board, and Secretariat documents such as guidelines and proposal templates were reviewed to establish the type of policies enacted and guidance provided from the Global Fund on multi-country initiatives and applications. From reviewing this information, the researchers created 29 variables according to eight dimensions to use in a review of Round 10 applications. All Round 10 multi-country applications (for HIV, malaria and tuberculosis) and all malaria multi-country applications (6) from Rounds 1 – 10 were extracted from the Global Fund website. A blind review was conducted of Round 10 applications using the 29 variables as a framework, followed by a review of four of the six successful malaria multi-country grant applications from Rounds 1 – 10.</p> <p>Findings</p> <p>During Rounds 3 – 10 of the Global Fund, only 5.8% of grants submitted were for multi-country initiatives. Out of 83 multi-country proposals submitted, 25.3% were approved by the Technical Review Panel (TRP) for funding, compared to 44.9% of single-country applications. The majority of approved multi-country applications were for HIV (76.2%), followed by malaria (19.0%), then tuberculosis (4.8%). TRP recommendations resulted in improvements to application forms, although guidance was generally vague. The in-depth review of Round 10 multi-country proposals showed that applicants described their projects in one of two ways: a regional ‘network approach’ by which benefits are derived from economies of scale or from enhanced opportunities for mutual support and learning or the development of common policies and approaches; or a ‘cross-border’ approach for enabling activities to be more effectively delivered towards border-crossing populations or vectors. In Round 10, only those with a ‘network approach’ were recommended for funding. The Global Fund has only ever approved six malaria multi-country applications. Four approved applications stated strong arguments for a multi-country initiative, combining both ‘cross-border’ and ‘network’ approaches.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>With the cancellation of Round 11 and the proposal that the Global Fund adopt a more targeted and strategic approach to funding, the time is opportune for the Global Fund to develop a clear consensus about the key factors and criteria for funding malaria specific multi-country initiatives. This study found that currently there was a lack of guidance on the key features that a successful multi-country proposal needs to be approved and that applications directed towards the ‘network’ approach were most successful in Round 10. This type of multi-country proposal may favour other diseases such as HIV, whereas the need for malaria control and elimination is different, focusing on cross-border coordination and delivery of interventions to specific groups. The Global Fund should seek to address these issues and give better guidance to countries and regions and investigate disease-specific calls for multi-country and regional applications.</p

Public health triangulation: approach and application to synthesizing data to understand national and local HIV epidemics

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Public health triangulation is a process for reviewing, synthesising and interpreting secondary data from multiple sources that bear on the same question to make public health decisions. It can be used to understand the dynamics of HIV transmission and to measure the impact of public health programs. While traditional intervention research and metaanalysis would be ideal sources of information for public health decision making, they are infrequently available, and often decisions can be based only on surveillance and survey data.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The process involves examination of a wide variety of data sources and both biological, behavioral and program data and seeks input from stakeholders to formulate meaningful public health questions. Finally and most importantly, it uses the results to inform public health decision-making. There are 12 discrete steps in the triangulation process, which included identification and assessment of key questions, identification of data sources, refining questions, gathering data and reports, assessing the quality of those data and reports, formulating hypotheses to explain trends in the data, corroborating or refining working hypotheses, drawing conclusions, communicating results and recommendations and taking public health action.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Triangulation can be limited by the quality of the original data, the potentials for ecological fallacy and "data dredging" and reproducibility of results.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Nonetheless, we believe that public health triangulation allows for the interpretation of data sets that cannot be analyzed using meta-analysis and can be a helpful adjunct to surveillance, to formal public health intervention research and to monitoring and evaluation, which in turn lead to improved national strategic planning and resource allocation.</p

An assessment of the malaria-related knowledge and practices of Tanzania's drug retailers: exploring the impact of drug store accreditation.

BACKGROUND: Since 2003 Tanzania has upgraded its approximately 7000 drug stores to Accredited Drug Dispensing Outlets (ADDOs), involving dispenser training, introduction of record keeping and enhanced regulation. Prior to accreditation, drug stores could officially stock over-the-counter medicines only, though many stocked prescription-only antimalarials. ADDOs are permitted to stock 49 prescription-only medicines, including artemisinin combination therapies and one form of quinine injectable. Oral artemisinin monotherapies and other injectables were not permitted at any time. By late 2011 conversion was complete in 14 of 21 regions. We explored variation in malaria-related knowledge and practices of drug retailers in ADDO and non-ADDO regions. METHODS: Data were collected as part of the Independent Evaluation of the Affordable Medicines Facility - malaria (AMFm), involving a nationally representative survey of antimalarial retailers in October-December 2011. We randomly selected 49 wards and interviewed all drug stores stocking antimalarials. We compare ADDO and non-ADDO regions, excluding the largest city, Dar es Salaam, due to the unique characteristics of its market. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted in 133 drug stores in ADDO regions and 119 in non-ADDO regions. Staff qualifications were very similar in both areas. There was no significant difference in the availability of the first line antimalarial (68.9% in ADDO regions and 65.2% in non-ADDO regions); both areas had over 98% availability of non-artemisinin therapies and below 3.0% of artemisinin monotherapies. Staff in ADDO regions had better knowledge of the first line antimalarial than non-ADDO regions (99.5% and 91.5%, p = 0.001). There was weak evidence of a lower price and higher market share of the first line antimalarial in ADDO regions. Drug stores in ADDO regions were more likely to stock ADDO-certified injectables than those in non-ADDO regions (23.0% and 3.9%, p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: ADDO conversion is frequently cited as a model for improving retail sector drug provision. Drug stores in ADDO regions performed better on some indicators, possibly indicating some small benefits from ADDO conversion, but also weaknesses in ADDO regulation and high staff turnover. More evidence is needed on the value-added and value for money of the ADDO roll out to inform retail policy in Tanzania and elsewhere

Health workforce issues and the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria: an analytical review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Recent studies have shown evidence of a direct and positive causal link between the number of health workers and health outcomes. Several studies have identified an adequate health workforce as one of the key ingredients to achieving improved health outcomes. Global health initiatives are faced with human resources issues as a major, system-wide constraint. This article explores how the Global Fund addresses the challenges of a health workforce bottleneck to the successful implementation of priority disease programmes.</p> <p>Possibilities for investment in human resources in the Global Fund's policy documents and guidelines are reviewed. This is followed by an in-depth study of 35 Global Fund proposals from five African countries: Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi and Tanzania. The discussion presents specific human resources interventions that can be found in proposals. Finally, the comments on human resources interventions in the Global Fund's Technical Review Panel and the budget allocation for human resources for health were examined.</p> <p>Policy documents and guidelines of the Global Fund foster taking account of human resources constraints in recipient countries and interventions to address them. However, the review of actual proposals clearly shows that countries do not often take advantage of their opportunities and focus mainly on short-term, in-service training in their human resources components.</p> <p>The comments of the Technical Review Panel on proposed health system-strengthening interventions reveal a struggle between the Global Fund's goal to fight the three targeted diseases, on the one hand, and the need to strengthen health systems as a prerequisite for success, on the other. In realizing the opportunities the Global Fund provides for human resources interventions, countries should go beyond short-term objectives and link their activities to a long-term development of their human resources for health.</p