Accessibility crisis of essential medicines at Sudanese primary healthcare facilities: a cross-sectional drugs' dispensaries assessment and patients' perspectives.
Affordability
Essential medicines
Primary healthcare services
Sudan’s healthcare
Universal health coverage
Journal
International journal for equity in health
ISSN: 1475-9276
Titre abrégé: Int J Equity Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101147692
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
17 10 2023
17 10 2023
Historique:
received:
22
07
2023
accepted:
12
09
2023
medline:
23
10
2023
pubmed:
18
10
2023
entrez:
18
10
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Access to essential medicines is a critical component of universal health coverage. However, the availability of essential medicines in Sudan isn't well studied. As well, most Sudanese people lack health insurance, making out-of-pocket spending the primary source of drug financing. Therefore, the affordability of medicines in Sudan is questionable, with only 30% of the total population being covered by a public health service or public health insurance. We undertook this study to assess the availability and prices of essential medicines in public-sector health facilities in Khartoum state. Moreover, this study aims at assessing patients' perceived affordability of essential medicines, and accommodation and acceptability of the public facility. A cross-sectional study was carried out at 30 primary healthcare facilities' drug dispensaries across three districts in Khartoum state. Within each Centre's dispensary unit, a standardized checklist evaluated the availability and affordability of 21 essential medicines selected from Sudan's national essential medicines list and assessed their storage conditions. Furthermore, 630 patients were selected from all dispensary units for an exit interview that assessed their perceived accessibility, acceptability, accommodation, and affordability of essential medicines. Data were collected through the Kobo toolbox and analyzed using SPSS version 26. Participants' ratings of accessibility, affordability, accommodation, and acceptability were 3.7/5, 1.5/4, 5/6, and 5.4/6, respectively, with a 26.7% full access and weak correlation between some of the indices. The overall availability of adults and pediatric medicines was 36.8% 6.7%, respectively. Cost of a single course of treatment for 10 and 16 drugs out of the 19 drugs consumed exceeds the daily wage of insured and uninsured patients, with a median price ratio of 16.4 and 62.8, respectively. Moreover, the dispensary area conditions were found to be of good quality, yet the storerooms were not functioning in 40% of the outlets. Patients had limited access to their needed drugs due to high prices and physical unavailability, and primary healthcare capacities are not meeting the demands of citizens. The outcomes for the patients' access variables (accessibility, accommodation, acceptance, and affordability) are comparable to those in countries with low incomes. Ensuring access to free medicines is likely to improve patients' satisfaction with healthcare services and reduce private expenditure on medicines, which is a long-term, sustainable way towards universal health coverage in Sudan.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Access to essential medicines is a critical component of universal health coverage. However, the availability of essential medicines in Sudan isn't well studied. As well, most Sudanese people lack health insurance, making out-of-pocket spending the primary source of drug financing. Therefore, the affordability of medicines in Sudan is questionable, with only 30% of the total population being covered by a public health service or public health insurance. We undertook this study to assess the availability and prices of essential medicines in public-sector health facilities in Khartoum state. Moreover, this study aims at assessing patients' perceived affordability of essential medicines, and accommodation and acceptability of the public facility.
METHODS
A cross-sectional study was carried out at 30 primary healthcare facilities' drug dispensaries across three districts in Khartoum state. Within each Centre's dispensary unit, a standardized checklist evaluated the availability and affordability of 21 essential medicines selected from Sudan's national essential medicines list and assessed their storage conditions. Furthermore, 630 patients were selected from all dispensary units for an exit interview that assessed their perceived accessibility, acceptability, accommodation, and affordability of essential medicines. Data were collected through the Kobo toolbox and analyzed using SPSS version 26.
RESULTS
Participants' ratings of accessibility, affordability, accommodation, and acceptability were 3.7/5, 1.5/4, 5/6, and 5.4/6, respectively, with a 26.7% full access and weak correlation between some of the indices. The overall availability of adults and pediatric medicines was 36.8% 6.7%, respectively. Cost of a single course of treatment for 10 and 16 drugs out of the 19 drugs consumed exceeds the daily wage of insured and uninsured patients, with a median price ratio of 16.4 and 62.8, respectively. Moreover, the dispensary area conditions were found to be of good quality, yet the storerooms were not functioning in 40% of the outlets.
CONCLUSION
Patients had limited access to their needed drugs due to high prices and physical unavailability, and primary healthcare capacities are not meeting the demands of citizens. The outcomes for the patients' access variables (accessibility, accommodation, acceptance, and affordability) are comparable to those in countries with low incomes. Ensuring access to free medicines is likely to improve patients' satisfaction with healthcare services and reduce private expenditure on medicines, which is a long-term, sustainable way towards universal health coverage in Sudan.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37848939
doi: 10.1186/s12939-023-02009-y
pii: 10.1186/s12939-023-02009-y
pmc: PMC10583350
doi:
Substances chimiques
Drugs, Essential
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
216Informations de copyright
© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Références
BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. 2015 Dec 23;16:43
pubmed: 26699711
Lancet. 2017 Jan 28;389(10067):403-476
pubmed: 27832874
Pharm World Sci. 2009 Apr;31(2):209-15
pubmed: 19263235
Lancet. 2006 Oct 14;368(9544):1357-64
pubmed: 17046468
Medicina (Kaunas). 2006;42(3):231-7
pubmed: 16607066
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Jul 20;20(1):669
pubmed: 32690003
Lancet. 2020 Jan 18;395(10219):171-173
pubmed: 31954447
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Mar 27;18(1):218
pubmed: 29587742
Health Policy Plan. 2020 Apr 1;35(3):323-333
pubmed: 31942625
J Health Popul Nutr. 2012 Mar;30(1):99-108
pubmed: 22524126
East Mediterr Health J. 2004 May;10(3):406-15
pubmed: 16212218
Health Policy. 2003 Aug;65(2):167-79
pubmed: 12849915
J Comp Eff Res. 2021 Feb;10(3):243-253
pubmed: 33541125
East Mediterr Health J. 2007 Nov-Dec;13(6):1476-85
pubmed: 18341197
Scand J Prim Health Care. 2007 Mar;25(1):27-32
pubmed: 17354156
Front Public Health. 2022 Apr 12;10:860471
pubmed: 35493374
Rev Saude Publica. 2017 Nov 13;51(suppl 2):20s
pubmed: 29160463
BMC Public Health. 2020 Sep 15;20(1):1405
pubmed: 32933517
East Mediterr Health J. 2012 Aug;18(8):811-20
pubmed: 23057369
Lancet Glob Health. 2013 Oct;1(4):e227-37
pubmed: 25104348
Public Health Pract (Oxf). 2020 Nov 23;1:100060
pubmed: 36101692
Ann Pharmacother. 2008 Mar;42(3):368-74
pubmed: 18272699
Lancet. 2009 Jan 17;373(9659):240-9
pubmed: 19042012
Value Health Reg Issues. 2020 Sep;22:27-34
pubmed: 32653861
Caspian J Intern Med. 2011 Fall;2(4):289-98
pubmed: 24551434