RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In 2009, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria established the Affordable Medicines Facility-malaria (AMFm) in order to increase access to quality-assured artemisinin combination therapy (QAACT). AMFm Phase 1, which includes nine pilot programmes in eight countries, was launched in 2009. The objective of this study was to assess anti-malarial stock and purchase patterns at private outlets in five AMFm Phase 1 countries in regard to three of the core AMFm goals: increase the affordability of QAACT, increase the availability of QAACT, and crowd out artemisinin monotherapies and other substandard therapies. METHODS: The study was conducted between April and May 2012 and included interviews with personnel in 598 private pharmaceutical outlets in Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Tanzania, and Uganda. Questionnaires were administered at private retail outlets and the data were analyzed to assess within- and between-country differences in QAACT price, availability, and popularity. RESULTS: AMFm medications were less expensive than their non-AMFm counterparts, yet prices for both types were above country-specific suggested retail prices. Market penetration of AMFm QAACT in both urban and rural areas was high, although stock-outs of both AMFm and non-AMFm products were more common in rural compared with urban outlets in Ghana and Kenya (p = 0.0013). Government recommendation was the most significant factor influencing anti-malarial stock choices in urban (41.5%) and rural (31.9%) outlets. The three top-selling anti-malarials reported for both urban and rural areas in each country were, with the exception of rural Uganda and urban Nigeria, combination therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study indicate that the AMFm has not fully achieved its affordability and crowd-out objectives. Still, the final purchase price of AMFm QAACT was substantially lower than non-AMFm equivalents. Moreover, for both urban and rural areas, AMFm QAACT availability was found to be high, and the various forms of QAACT were the best-selling products among all anti-malarials. These findings suggest a continued need for initiatives like the AMFm that improve the affordability and accessibility of QAACT. Similar programmes may be especially effective if employed in combination with rapid diagnostic testing to ensure the appropriate use of these products.
Asunto(s)
Artemisininas/uso terapéutico , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Malaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Sector Privado , África , Quimioterapia Combinada/métodos , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Farmacias , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Limited access to drugs is a crucial barrier to reducing the growing impact of cancer in low- and middle-income countries. Approaches based on drug donations or adaptive pricing strategies yield promising but varying results across countries or programs, The Glivec International Patient Assistance Program (GIPAP) is a program designed to provide imatinib free of charge to patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) or gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST). The objective of this work was to identify institutional factors associated with enrollment and patient survival in GIPAP. METHODS: We analyzed follow-up data from 4,946 patients participating in 47 institutions within 44 countries between 2003 and 2010. Active status in the program was considered as a proxy for survival. RESULTS: Presence of ≥1 hematologist or oncologist at the institution was associated with increased patient enrollment. After adjusting for individual factors such as age (>55 years: Hazard Ratio [HR] = 1.42 [1.16; 1.73]; p = 0.001) and initial stage of disease (accelerated or blast crisis at diagnosis: HR = 4.16 [1.87; 9.25]; p < 10â»4), increased survival was found in institutions with research capabilities (HR = 0.55 [0.35; 0.86]; p = 0.01) and those with enrollment of >5 patients/year into GIPAP (HR = 0.48 [0.35; 0.67]; p < 10â»4), while a non-significant trend for decreased survival was found for treatment at a public institution (HR = 1.32 [0.95; 1.84]; p = 0.10). The negative impact of an accelerated form of CML was attenuated by the presence of ≥1 hematologist or oncologist at the institution (interaction term HR = 0.43 [0.18; 0.99]; p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Application of these findings to the support and selection of institutions participating in GIPAP may help to optimize care and outcomes for CML and GIST patients in the developing world. These results may also be applicable to the treatment of patients with other forms of cancer, due to the overlap of infrastructure and staff resources used to treat a variety of cancer indications. A multi-sector approach is required to address these barriers.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos/provisión & distribución , Benzamidas/provisión & distribución , Países en Desarrollo , Tumores del Estroma Gastrointestinal/tratamiento farmacológico , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Leucemia Mieloide/tratamiento farmacológico , Piperazinas/provisión & distribución , Pirimidinas/provisión & distribución , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Mesilato de Imatinib , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , SobrevidaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The Glivec International Patient Assistance Program (GIPAP) is designed to provide access to the cancer therapy Imatinib (Glivecâ ), which is indicated for the treatment of chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) and gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST). OBJECTIVES: To identify factors those influence the quality of care and structural improvements. Design . Physicians (n=50), hospital administrators (n=10) and Ministry of Health officials (n=7) in 39 developing countries participated in qualitative interviews. The interviews focused on the impact of GIPAP on service delivery, patient tracking systems and cancer registries, health financing, and workforce. RESULTS: Service delivery, patient management, access to care, diagnostic capacity, and health workers' skills improved at participants' institutions following implementation of GIPAP. CONCLUSIONS: Positive institutional changes that improve care of CML/GIST patients arose from GIPAP. Some of these changes may strengthen institutions' capacity to treat other diseases as well. The GIPAP model could be deployed to improve access to care for patients with other chronic diseases.