Dataset Information

Quantifying the impoverishing effects of purchasing medicines: a cross-country comparison of the affordability of medicines in the developing world.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Increasing attention is being paid to the affordability of medicines in low- and middle-income countries (LICs and MICs) where medicines are often highly priced in relation to income levels. The impoverishing effect of medicine purchases can be estimated by determining pre- and postpayment incomes, which are then compared to a poverty line. Here we estimate the impoverishing effects of four medicines in 16 LICs and MICs using the impoverishment method as a metric of affordability. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Affordability was assessed in terms of the proportion of the population being pushed below US$1.25 or US$2 per day poverty levels because of the purchase of medicines. The prices of salbutamol 100 mcg/dose inhaler, glibenclamide 5 mg cap/tab, atenolol 50 mg cap/tab, and amoxicillin 250 mg cap/tab were obtained from facility-based surveys undertaken using a standard measurement methodology. The World Bank's World Development Indicators provided household expenditure data and information on income distributions. In the countries studied, purchasing these medicines would impoverish large portions of the population (up to 86%). Originator brand products were less affordable than the lowest-priced generic equivalents. In the Philippines, for example, originator brand atenolol would push an additional 22% of the population below US$1.25 per day, whereas for the lowest priced generic equivalent this demographic shift is 7%. Given related prevalence figures, substantial numbers of people are affected by the unaffordability of medicines. CONCLUSIONS: Comparing medicine prices to available income in LICs and MICs shows that medicine purchases by individuals in those countries could lead to the impoverishment of large numbers of people. Action is needed to improve medicine affordability, such as promoting the use of quality assured, low-priced generics, and establishing health insurance systems. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

SUBMITTER: Niens LM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2930876 | biostudies-literature | 2010

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Quantifying the impoverishing effects of purchasing medicines: a cross-country comparison of the affordability of medicines in the developing world.

Niëns Laurens M LM Cameron Alexandra A Van de Poel Ellen E Ewen Margaret M Brouwer Werner B F WB Laing Richard R

PLoS medicine 20100831 8

<h4>Background</h4>Increasing attention is being paid to the affordability of medicines in low- and middle-income countries (LICs and MICs) where medicines are often highly priced in relation to income levels. The impoverishing effect of medicine purchases can be estimated by determining pre- and postpayment incomes, which are then compared to a poverty line. Here we estimate the impoverishing effects of four medicines in 16 LICs and MICs using the impoverishment method as a metric of affordabil ...[more]

PMID: 20824175

Similar Datasets

Project description:Switching or reclassifying medicines with established safety profiles from prescription to non-prescription aims to increase timely consumer access to medicines, reduce under-treatment and enhance self-management. However, risks include suboptimal therapy and adverse effects. With a long-standing government policy supporting switching or reclassifying medicines from prescription to non-prescription, the United Kingdom is believed to lead the world in switch, but evidence for this is inconclusive. Interest in switching medicines for certain long-term conditions has arisen in the United Kingdom, United States, and Europe, but such switches have been contentious. The objective of this study was then to provide a comprehensive comparison of progress in switch for medicines across six developed countries: the United States; the United Kingdom; Australia; Japan; the Netherlands; and New Zealand.A list of prescription-to-non-prescription medicine switches was systematically compiled. Three measures were used to compare switch activity across the countries: "progressive" switches from 2003 to 2013 (indicating incremental consumer benefit over current non-prescription medicines); "first-in-world" switches from 2003 to 2013; and switch date comparisons for selected medicines.New Zealand was the most active in progressive switches from 2003 to 2013, with the United Kingdom and Japan not far behind. The United States, Australia and the Netherlands showed the least activity in this period. Few medicines for long-term conditions were switched, even in the United Kingdom and New Zealand where first-in-world switches were most likely. Switch of certain medicines took considerably longer in some countries than others. For example, a consumer in the United Kingdom could self-medicate with a non-sedating antihistamine 19 years earlier than a consumer in the United States.Proactivity in medicines switching, most notably in New Zealand and the United Kingdom, questions missed opportunities to enhance consumers' self-management in countries such as the United States.

Project description:IntroductionThe Malawian government recently introduced cost-covering consultation fees for self-referral patients in tertiary public hospitals. Previously, patients received medicines free of charge in government-owned health facilities, but must pay elsewhere. Before the government implements a payment policy in other areas of health care, it is important to investigate the prices, affordability and availability of essential medicines in Malawi.MethodsData on availability and prices of 50 essential medicines were collected in 44 health facilities in two major cities and two districts. These included 12 public facilities, 11 facilities of the Christian Health Association of Malawi (CHAM), nine retail pharmacies, eight wholesalers and four private clinics/hospitals. Price, availability and affordability were assessed based on the methodology developed by the World Health Organization and Health Action International, which compares local prices to international reference prices.Results and discussionThe overall availability of medicines was 48.5% in public facilities, 71.1% in retail pharmacies, 62.9% in CHAM facilities and 57.5% in private clinics. The availability of essential medicines varied from 0% for ethosuximide to 100% for amoxicillin and cotrimoxazole tablets. Antibiotic formulations for adults were widely available, in contrast to the low availability of pediatric formulations. Several medicines for non-communicable diseases like sodium valproate, phenytoin, paraldehyde, captopril and simvastatin showed poor availability and affordability. The overall median price ratio compared to the international reference price was 1.11 for wholesalers, 2.54 in CHAM facilities, 2.70 in retail pharmacies, and 4.01 in private clinics, which is low compared to other countries. But nevertheless, for 18 out of 32 medicines assessed, the cost of one course exceeded the statutory minimum daily wage, making them unaffordable to a majority of the population. Therefore, continued provision of free public health care is still of critical importance for the foreseeable future until other financing mechanisms have been explored.

Project description:BackgroundMedications and their prices are key issues for healthcare. Although access to medicines at affordable prices had been specified as a key objective of the European Health Policy, it seems that these goals have not been achieved. Therefore, we attempted an evaluation of affordability of selected medicines at full prices.MethodsThe analysis concerned 2012 and was conducted between 2013 and 2015 in all the European Union (EU) countries divided into 3 groups depending on the date of their accession to the EU. Finally, we considered 9 originators used in the treatment of schizophrenia and multiple sclerosis. Information on drug prices were collected from pharmacies. Participation in the study was voluntary and anonymous in order to avoid accusations of advertising. To evaluate affordability, several factors were used (e.g. minimum earnings and Gini coefficient). Due to unavailability in some countries, the exact number of analyzed medicines varies.ResultsDrug prices vary significantly between EU Member States. Almost eleven fold difference was observed between Germany (EUR 1451.17) and Croatia (EUR 132.77) in relation to Interferone beta-1a 22 μg. Generally, prices were the highest in Germany. The cheapest drugs were found in various countries but never in the poorest ones like Bulgaria or Romania. Discrepancies in wages were observed too (the smallest minimum wage was EUR 138.00 in Bulgaria and the highest EUR 1801.00 in Luxembourg). Full price of olanzapine 5mg, however, was higher in Bulgaria (EUR 64.53) than, for instance, in Belgium (EUR 37.26).ConclusionsAnalyzed medications are still unaffordable for many citizens of the EU. Besides, access to medicines is also impaired e.g. due to parallel trade. Unaffordability of medications may lead to the patients' non-compliance and therefore to increased direct and indirect costs of treatment. Common European solutions are needed to achieve a real affordability and accessibility of medications.

Project description:Haiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere and faces numerous challenges, including inadequate medication access for its residents. The objective of this study was to determine the availability, prices, and affordability of essential medicines in Haiti and compare these findings to other countries.We conducted a cross-sectional nationwide survey in 2011 of availability and consumer prices of 60 essential medicines in Haiti using a standardized methodology developed by the World Health Organization and Health Action International. The survey was conducted in 163 medicine outlets in four health care sectors (public, retail, nonprofit and mixed sectors). Medicine prices were expressed as ratios relative to the International Reference Price. Affordability was calculated by comparing the costs of treatment for common conditions with the salary of the lowest paid government worker and was compared to available data from four Latin American countries.For generic medicines, the availability in public, retail, nonprofit and mixed sectors was 20%, 37%, 24% and 23% of medications, respectively. Most of the available medicines were priced higher than the International Reference Price. The lowest paid government worker would need 2.5 days' wages to treat an adult respiratory infection with generic medicines from the public sector. For treatment of common conditions with originator brands (OB) purchased from a retail pharmacy, costs were between 1.4 (anaerobic bacterial infection) and 13.7 (hyperlipidemia) days' wages, respectively. Treatment of pediatric bacterial infections with the OB of ceftriaxone from a retail pharmacy would cost 24.6 days' wages. Prices in Bolivia, Colombia, Mexico and Nicaragua were frequently lower for comparable medications.The availability of essential medicines was low and prices varied widely across all four sectors. Over 75% of Haitians live on less than US$ 2.00 /day; therefore, most medication regimens are largely unaffordable. Inclusion of essential medications on the national formulary and working with organizations responsible for importing medications into Haiti, particularly drug donation agencies, are important first steps to increasing medication access.

Project description:BackgroundAccess to affordable and good quality medicines is a key to meeting Sustainable Development Goal No. 3 by the year 2030. Prices, availability and affordability of essential medicines have been studied in many developing countries, but no such information has been published about Rwanda yet. This study aimed at providing data on prices, availability and affordability of medicines in different health facilities of Rwanda.MethodsA survey was carried out on availability, prices and affordability of 18 medicines in Kigali City and five districts of Rwanda. 44 health facilities were surveyed, including public and faith-based hospitals, public and faith-based health centers and private pharmacies. The standardized methodology developed by WHO and Health Action International (HAI) was used to collect and analyze the data.FindingsPrices for generic medicines in public and faith-based health facilities were remarkably low, with median price ratios (MPRs) of 1.0 in comparison to the international procurement prices published by Management Sciences for Health. In private pharmacies, prices were twice as high (MPR = 1.99 for generics). Availability of medicines fell short of the of 80% target set by WHO, but was better than reported from many other developing countries. Availability of medicines was highest in the private sector (71.3%) and slightly lower in the faith-based (62.8%) and public (59.6%) sectors. The government procurement agency was found to work efficiently, achieving prices 30% below the international procurement price given in the International Medical Product Price Guide. Affordability of medicines was better in the public and faith-based sectors than in the private sector.ConclusionIn Rwanda, medicines are affordable but poorly available in both the public and the faith-based sectors. Further improvements of the availability of medicines in the public and the faith-based health facilities represent the most important key to increase accessibility and affordability of medicines in Rwanda.

Project description:ObjectivesPrime focus of this study was to evaluate the availability and affordability of originator brands (OBs) and lowest price generics (LPGs) of prescribed biologic and non-biologic anticancer medicines.Design, settings and participantsA descriptive, cross-sectional survey was conducted in 22 cancer-care hospitals (18 public hospitals and 4 private hospitals) and 44 private pharmacies in Punjab, Pakistan. Sampling population consisted of 4483 patients with cancer aged ?18 years. The availability was determined by classifying anticancer medicines in four categories: absent/unavailability (medicines not present in any surveyed facility), low availability (medicines present in <50% of surveyed facilities), fairly high availability (medicines present in 50%-74% of surveyed facilities) and high availability (medicines present in >75% of surveyed facilities). Medicines were affordable if overall cost of all the prescribed anticancer medicines were 20% of the household capacity to pay. Data were analysed by using Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, V.21.0).ResultsA total of 5060 patients with cancer were approached out of which 4483 patients were included in the survey. Overall, 10?103 anticancer drugs were prescribed. Among them, 96.3% were non-biologics and 3.7% were biologics. Oncologists were reluctant to prescribe biologics due to high prices. 58.1% of non-biologics were affordable; whereas, the affordability of biologics was 3.3%. A total of 43.9% of both biologic and non-biologic OBs were available; whereas, their affordability was 44.2%. On the other hand, the availability of LPGs was 21.3%, and their affordability was 66.1%. For low-income patients, the affordability of non-biologics was 31.6% and the affordability of biologics was 1.1%.ConclusionsMost of the patients with cancer were prescribed non-biologics due to their low price and better affordability. In contrast to OBs, LPGs of both biologics and non-biologics had less availability but more affordability.

Dataset Information

Quantifying the impoverishing effects of purchasing medicines: a cross-country comparison of the affordability of medicines in the developing world.

Publications

Quantifying the impoverishing effects of purchasing medicines: a cross-country comparison of the affordability of medicines in the developing world.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets