Management of type 1 diabetes in low- and middle-income countries: Comparative health system assessments in Kyrgyzstan, Mali, Peru and Tanzania.

AIMS: To describe and compare the health system responses for type 1 diabetes in Kyrgyzstan, Mali, Peru and Tanzania. METHODS: The Rapid Assessment Protocol for Insulin Access, a multi-level assessment of the health system, was implemented in Kyrgyzstan, Mali, Peru and Tanzania using document reviews, site visits and interviews to assess the delivery of care and access to insulin. RESULTS: Despite the existence of noncommunicable or diabetes strategies and Universal Health Coverage policies including diabetes-related supplies, this has not necessarily translated into access to insulin or diabetes care for all. Insulin and related supplies were often unavailable and unaffordable. Across the four countries test strips and insulin, when paid for by the individual, represented respectively 48-82% and 25-36% of total costs. Care was mainly delivered at tertiary-level hospitals by specialists. Only Kyrgyzstan had data collection systems integrated into the Ministry of Health structure. In addition, issues with healthcare worker training and education and empowerment of people with diabetes were present in these health systems. CONCLUSIONS: People with type 1 diabetes in these countries face different barriers, including the cost of insulin and care. Given the renewed attention to diabetes on the global health agenda tailored health system responses for type 1 diabetes are needed. Insulin should be prioritized as it is the foundation of type 1 diabetes care, but other elements of care and support need to be fostered by different actors.

Availability, prices, and affordability of selected essential cancer medicines in a middle-income country - the case of Mexico.

BACKGROUND: More alternatives have become available for the diagnosis and treatment of cancer in low- and middle-income countries. Because of increasing demands, governments are now facing a problem of limited affordability and availability of essential cancer medicines. Yet, precise information about the access to these medicines is limited, and the methodology is not very well developed. We assessed the availability and affordability of essential cancer medicines in Mexico, and compared their prices against those in other countries of the region. METHODS: We surveyed 21 public hospitals and 19 private pharmacies in 8 states of Mexico. Data were collected on the availability and prices of 49 essential cancer medicines. Prices were compared against those in Chile, Peru, Brazil, Colombia and PAHO's Strategic Fund. RESULTS: Of the various medicines, mean availability in public and private sector outlets was 61.2 and 67.5%, respectively. In the public sector, medicines covered by the public health insurance "People's Health Insurance" were more available. Only seven (public sector) and five (private sector) out of the 49 medicines were considered affordable. Public sector procurement prices were 41% lower than in other countries of the region. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of essential cancer medicines, in the public and private sector, falls below World Health Organization's 80% target. The affordability remains suboptimal as well. A national health insurance scheme could serve as a mechanism to improve access to cancer medicines in the public sector. Comprehensive pricing policies are warranted to improve the affordability of cancer medicines in the private sector.

[Insulin: prices, availability, and affordability in public and private Peruvian pharmaciesPreço, disponibilidade e acessibilidade à insulina em farmácias públicas e privadas no Peru]. / Precios, disponibilidad y asequibilidad de insulina en farmacias públicas y privadas en Perú.

OBJECTIVE: Measure and compare the price, availability, and affordability of insulin and metformin in public and private pharmacies in six regions of Peru. METHODS: Cross-sectional study using the World Health Organization/Health Action International (WHO/HAI) revised methodology. Public and private pharmacies in six regions of Peru were surveyed. Data were collected on availability and prices for insulin (all types) and 850 mg metformin. Availability is expressed as percentages and prices are reported in medians. Affordability is defined as the number of days that a person must work at minimum wage to cover the cost of one month of treatment. RESULTS: Availability in public pharmacies is 63.2% for regular insulin and 68.4% for NPH (isophane) insulin, but differences in availability were observed between levels of care and between regions. Private pharmacies have a greater variety of insulin, but availability is less than 11%. The median price of human insulin was three to four times higher in private pharmacies than in public pharmacies. In comparison, availability of metformin was 89.5% in public pharmacies and 77.7% in private ones. Affordability in public pharmacies for one month of treatment with human insulin or generic metformin is less than one day's wages. CONCLUSIONS: The price for human insulin and generic metformin in public pharmacies is affordable. However, efforts are needed to improve their availability in the different regions and levels of care.

OBJETIVO: Avaliar o preço, a disponibilidade e a acessibilidade à insulina e metformina, como comparativo, em farmácias públicas e privadas em seis regiões do Peru. MÉTODOS: Estudo transversal conduzido com metodologia adaptada da Organização Mundial da Saúde/Ação Internacional para a Saúde (OMS/AIS). Farmácias públicas e privadas foram pesquisadas em seis regiões do Peru com a coleta de dados sobre a disponibilidade e os preços da insulina (de todos os tipos) e metformina na apresentação de 850 mg. A disponibilidade é expressa em porcentagem e os preços estão descritos como mediana. A acessibilidade foi definida no estudo como o número de dias que um indivíduo que ganha salário mínimo precisa trabalhar para arcar com o custo de um mês de tratamento. RESULTADOS: A disponibilidade em farmácias públicas da insulina regular foi de 63,2% e da insulina isófana (NPH) foi de 68,4%, porém se observou diferença de disponibilidade entre os níveis de atenção e as regiões. Nas farmácias privadas, a variedade de insulinas é maior, mas a disponibilidade é inferior a 11%. A mediana de preços para a insulina humana nas farmácias privadas é 3 a 4 vezes maior que nas farmácias públicas. Comparativamente, a disponibilidade da metformina foi de 89,5% nas farmácias públicas e 77,7% nas farmácias privadas. A acessibilidade nas farmácias públicas para um mês de tratamento com insulina humana ou metformina genérica é inferior à remuneração de um dia de trabalho. CONCLUSÕES: As insulinas humanas e a metformina genérica têm preço acessível nas farmácias públicas. Porém, esforços devem ser empreendidos para aumentar a disponibilidade destes medicamentos nos níveis de atenção e nas regiões.

Availability and Affordability of Essential Medicines: Implications for Global Diabetes Treatment.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to highlight the key issues with regard to the value, affordability, and availability of diabetes treatments. RECENT FINDINGS: Many of the medicines needed to manage diabetes are available as generics and, if purchased appropriately, can be made affordable to many individuals and systems. With new treatments for diabetes, additional costs to individuals and systems need to be assessed in terms of added clinical benefit and financial impact. As healthcare finances are limited, increased spending on diabetes medicines means fewer resources for other areas of diabetes care or for the population as a whole. This increased expenditure is driven by rising prevalence as well as the cost of newer treatments. With an increasing burden of disease and changing patterns of medicines in the market, we stress the need to focus attention on ensuring access for individuals to essential medicines. Universal health care offers unique opportunity to address the issue of access to medicines and the wider issues surrounding access to diabetes care, but this will require concerted action bringing together governments, civil society and the private sector.

Insulin prices, availability and affordability: a cross-sectional survey of pharmacies in Hubei Province, China.

BACKGROUND: Poor access to affordable insulin results in serious and needless complications and premature deaths for those with diabetes who need this essential medicine. To help address this issue, we assessed insulin availability, prices, affordability and price components in Hubei Province as China has the heaviest burden of diabetes globally. METHODS: In 2016, insulin availability and price data was collected in the capital and five other cities. A total of 30 public sector outlets (hospitals and primary care institutions) and 30 private pharmacies were sampled, using an adaptation of the World Health Organization/Health Action International methodology, Data was collected for all human and analogue insulins in stock, then analyzed by type (prandial, basal or pre-mixed) and duration of action. Prices were expressed as Median Price Ratios (MPRs) to Australian PBS prices. Price components were tracked for five insulin products in two cities.. Affordability was assessed as the number of days' wages of the lowest paid unskilled government worker needed to purchase 10 ml 100 IU/ml (approximately 30 days' supply). RESULTS: Mean availability was highest in public hospitals for prandial (70%), basal (80%) and pre-mixed insulin (90%). In primary care institutions and private pharmacies mean availability ranged from 10% to 33%. Median prices of all insulin types were higher that Australian PBS prices in all three sectors for human and analogue insulins (ranging from1.36-2.59 times). Patients have to pay 4 to 16 days' wages to purchase a month's treatment depending on the insulin type and sector. The largest component of the patient price was the manufacturers' selling price (60%). Taxes in the form of import duties and VAT are applied in some sectors. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of insulin in primary care institutions and private retail pharmacies was very low in Hubei. Only public hospitals had good insulin availability. Insulin prices were high in all sectors making this life-saving medicine unaffordable, especially for those on low incomes. Governments should consider using its bargaining power to reduce prices, abolish taxes on essential medicines such as insulin, and develop strategies for more equitable access to insulin.

Using government data to understand the use and availability of medicines for hypertension and diabetes: lessons from Peru.

BACKGROUND: Regular measurement of the availability and use of key medicines for non-communicable diseases allows the tracking of progress to achieve equitable access to medicines. Using a country-level public sector monitoring system for medicine supply, we aim to evaluate the availability and use of losartan 50 mg tablets and metformin 850 mg tablets between 2015 and 2020 investigating the impact of different policy changes and the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Data from the Peruvian National System of Medicine Supply were analyzed using an interrupted time series analysis with known and unknown structural breaks. The outcomes assessed were medicine use (monthly doses dispensed at facilities over time) and medicine availability (proportion of facilities that reported having the medicine available). RESULTS: The use of losartan and metformin at the primary level of care had a linear increasing trend over the period of analysis. In secondary and tertiary levels of care, there were no increases but some significant level and trend changes of doses dispensed at different times between 2017 to 2019, but none were related to the change of procurement procedures. At all levels of care, the COVID-19 onset in April 2020 caused an abrupt drop in doses dispensed especially at the primary level. Regarding availability, we found an increasing linear trend in the primary level of care for both medicines. In secondary and tertiary levels of care, the availability fluctuated between 40 and 95%. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic did not significantly impact medicine availability, except for losartan in the tertiary level of care. CONCLUSION: The availability and proper dispensing of first-line medicines for hypertension and diabetes is an essential factor for sustainable and equitable treatment. Health care systems need to be prepared for forecasting the increasing demand of medicines for chronic diseases, but also to maintain effective medicine supply chains during humanitarian crisis like pandemics.

Differences in the availability of medicines for chronic and acute conditions in the public and private sectors of developing countries.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate potential differences in the availability of medicines for chronic and acute conditions in low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: Data on the availability of 30 commonly-surveyed medicines - 15 for acute and 15 for chronic conditions - were obtained from facility-based surveys conducted in 40 developing countries. Results were aggregated by World Bank country income group and World Health Organization region. FINDINGS: The availability of medicines for both acute and chronic conditions was suboptimal across countries, particularly in the public sector. Generic medicines for chronic conditions were significantly less available than generic medicines for acute conditions in both the public sector (36.0% availability versus 53.5%; P = 0.001) and the private sector (54.7% versus 66.2%; P = 0.007). Antiasthmatics, antiepileptics and antidepressants, followed by antihypertensives, were the drivers of the observed differences. An inverse association was found between country income level and the availability gap between groups of medicines, particularly in the public sector. In low- and lower-middle income countries, drugs for acute conditions were 33.9% and 12.9% more available, respectively, in the public sector than medicines for chronic conditions. Differences in availability were smaller in the private sector than in the public sector in all country income groups. CONCLUSION: Current disease patterns do not explain the significant gaps observed in the availability of medicines for chronic and acute conditions. Measures are needed to better respond to the epidemiological transition towards chronic conditions in developing countries alongside current efforts to scale up treatment for communicable diseases.

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

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.

Measuring medicine prices in Peru: validation of key aspects of WHO/HAI survey methodology.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the possibility of bias due to the limited target list and geographic sampling of the World Health Organization (WHO)/Health Action International (HAI) Medicine Prices and Availability survey used in more than 70 rapid sample surveys since 2001. METHODS: A survey was conducted in Peru in 2005 using an expanded sample of medicine outlets, including remote areas. Comprehensive data were gathered on medicines in three therapeutic classes to assess the adequacy of WHO/HAI's target medicines list and the focus on only two product versions. WHO/HAI median retail prices were compared with average wholesale prices from global pharmaceutical sales data supplier IMS Health. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in overall availability or prices of target list medicines by retail location. The comprehensive survey of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, anti-diabetic, and anti-ulcer products revealed that some treatments not on the target list were costlier for patients and more likely to be unavailable, particularly in remote areas. WHO/HAI retail prices and IMS wholesale prices were strongly correlated for higher priced products, and weakly correlated for lower priced products (which had higher estimated retailer markups). CONCLUSIONS: The WHO/HAI survey approach strikes an appropriate balance between modest research costs and optimal information for policy. Focusing on commonly used medicines yields sufficient and valid results. Surveyors elsewhere should consider the limits of the survey data as well as any local circumstances, such as scarcity, that may call for extra field efforts.

Availability, Price, and Affordability of Essential Medicines to Manage Noncommunicable Diseases: A National Survey From Nepal.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the availability, price, and affordability of essential noncommunicable disease (NCD) medicines in Nepal. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in Nepal in 2015 using World Health Organization/Health Action International (WHO/HAI) methodology. We collected data on the availability and price of 60 essential NCD medicines from medicine distribution outlets in both the public and private health care sectors in 6 regions. Essential NCD medicines were more available in the private sector (78%) than the public sector (60%). Furosemide tablets were the cheapest (NPR 0.6/10 tablets) and streptokinase injections were the most expensive (NPR 2200/vial) drugs. There was no significant difference (P > .05) in availability and affordability of essential NCD medicines across the 6 survey areas. Treating selected NCD conditions with medicines was generally affordable, with 1 month of treatment costing no more than a day's wage of the lowest paid unskilled government worker. The lower availability of NCD medicines in the public sector limits the effectiveness of the government's policy of providing free health services at public facilities. Although NCD medicines were generally affordable, future health policy should aim to ensure improved equitable access to NCD medicines, particularly in public facilities.

Insulin price components: case studies in six low/middle-income countries.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding price components for insulin products can help design interventions to improve insulin affordability in low/middle-income countries. METHODS: An adapted WHO/Health Action International standardised methodology was used in Brazil (Rio de Janeiro), China (Hubei and Shaanxi Provinces), Ghana, India (Haryana State), Indonesia and Uganda. Selected insulin products had their prices traced backwards through the supply chain from public and private sector retail outlets in the capital city and a district town, supplemented with key informant interviews. RESULTS: Cumulative mark-ups ranged from 8.7% to 565.8% but the magnitude of mark-ups was country specific and variable within and across sectors and regions. The proportion of the patient price attributed to the manufacturer's selling price varied from 15.0% to 92.0%. Pricing regulations in China, India and Indonesia reduced wholesale and retail mark-ups but did not guarantee low prices. Most countries had removed import duties (Ghana, India, Indonesia, Uganda), but additional tariffs of 3.5% were still applied in Ghana. Value-added tax in the private sector ranged from 5% to 20% across the countries. CONCLUSION: There are no clear trends in the mark-ups applied to insulin or specific differences in the price structure. A uniform approach to improving insulin access through regulating price components is unlikely to be successful, but elimination of duties and taxes, price regulation and greater price transparency could help influence prices and hence affordability.

Insulin prices, availability and affordability in 13 low-income and middle-income countries.

INTRODUCTION: Globally, one in two people needing insulin lack access. High prices and poor availability are thought to be key contributors to poor insulin access. However, few studies have assessed the availability, price and affordability of different insulin types in low-income and middle-income countries in a systematic way. METHODS: In 2016, 15 insulin price and availability surveys were undertaken (using an adaptation of the WHO/Health Action International medicine price and availability measurement methodology) in Brazil, China (Hubei and Shaanxi Provinces), Ethiopia, Ghana, India (Haryana and Madhya Pradesh States), Indonesia, Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Mali, Pakistan, Russia (Kazan Province) and Uganda. Data were collected in three sectors (public, private pharmacies and private hospitals/clinics) in three regions per survey. Insulin prices were standardised to 10 mL 100 IU/mL in US dollars ($). Data were also collected for four comparator medicines. RESULTS: Mean availability was higher for human (55%-80%) versus analogue insulins (55%-63%), but only short-acting human insulin reached 80% availability (public sector). Median government procurement prices were $5 (human insulins) and $33 (long-acting analogues). In all three sectors, median patient prices were $9 for human insulins. Median patient prices for analogues varied between the public sector ($34) and the two private sectors ($44). Vials were cheaper than pens and cartridges. Biosimilars, when available, were mostly cheaper than originators. A low-income person had to work 4 and 7 days to buy 10 mL human and analogue insulin, respectively. For isophane human insulin, only three countries meet the WHO target of 80% availability of affordable essential medicines for non-communicable diseases in any sector. CONCLUSION: Improving insulin availability and affordability needs to be addressed through national and global actions, including prioritising the supply of more affordable human insulin, increasing competition through the use of lower priced quality-assured biosimilars, negotiating lower prices from manufacturers and improving distribution systems.

Prices & availability of common medicines at six sites in India using a standard methodology.

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: The price and availability of medicines are key components in determining access to effective treatment. Data on prices and availability of common medicines in public and private sector in different States of India are scarce. Hence, surveys were undertaken in different States of India to evaluate these metrics. METHODS: During October 2004 to January 2005, six surveys were undertaken simultaneously in five States of India to assess medicine prices and availability of essential medicines (n = 21-28) using the World Health Organization and Health Action International methodology. Surveys were conducted at Chennai, Haryana, Karnataka, West Bengal, and at two sites in Maharashtra. For each medicine, data were collected for the Innovator Brand (IB), Most Sold Generic (MSG), and Lowest Priced Generic (LPG) at randomly selected public and private facilities in each site surveyed. Prices were compared to an international reference benchmark (expressed as median price ratio - MPR). RESULTS: The procurement price of medicines in the public sector was 0.27 to 0.48 times the international reference price. However, these medicines were inadequately available and the median availability in the public sector ranged from 0 to 30 per cent. The median prices of medicines in the private sector were less than twice the IRP, although a few innovator brands were more expensive. No difference was observed between the prices of the most sold generic (MSG) and the lowest priced generic (LPG) available at the facilities. Interestingly, price variation was observed among different generic equivalents of ciprofloxacin in each region. The price of LPG diazepam in the private sector was thirty three times its procurement price in the public sector. INTERPRETATION & CONCLUSION: The survey revealed low procurement prices and poor availability in the public sector. Thus, the majority of the population purchased medicines from private pharmacies, where generics were usually available although prices of certain medicines were high. Various policy measures could increase the availability and accessibility of medicines for the population.

Baseline assessment of WHO's target for both availability and affordability of essential medicines to treat non-communicable diseases.

BACKGROUND: WHO has set a voluntary target of 80% availability of affordable essential medicines, including generics, to treat major non-communicable diseases (NCDs), in the public and private sectors of countries by 2025. We undertook a secondary analysis of data from 30 surveys in low- and middle-income countries, conducted from 2008-2015 using the World Health Organization (WHO)/Health Action International (HAI) medicine availability and price survey methodology, to establish a baseline for this target. METHODS: Data for 49 medicines (lowest priced generics and originator brands) to treat cardiovascular diseases (CVD), diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (COPD) and central nervous system (CNS) conditions were analysed to determine their availability in healthcare facilities and pharmacies, their affordability for those on low incomes (based on median patient prices of each medicine), and the percentage of medicines that were both available and affordable. Affordability was expressed as the number of days' wages of the lowest-paid unskilled government worker needed to purchase 30 days' supply using standard treatment regimens. Paying more than 1 days' wages was considered unaffordable. FINDINGS: In low-income countries, 15.2% and 18.9% of lowest-priced generics met WHO's target in the public and private sectors, respectively, and 2.6% and 5.2% of originator brands. In lower-middle income countries, 23.8% and 23.2% of lowest priced generics, and 0.8% and 1.4% of originator brands, met the target in the public and private sectors, respectively. In upper-middle income countries, the situation was better for generics but still suboptimal as 36.0% and 39.4% met the target in public and private sectors, respectively. For originator brands in upper-middle income countries, none reached the target in the public sector and 13.7% in the private sector. Across the therapeutic groups for lowest priced generics, CVD medicines in low-income countries (11.9%), and CNS medicines in lower-middle (10.2%) and upper-middle income countries (33.3%), were least available and affordable in the public sector. In the private sector for lowest priced generics, CNS medicines were least available and affordable in all three country income groups (11.4%, 5.8% and 29.3% in low-, lower-middle and upper-middle income countries respectively). INTERPRETATION: This data, which can act as a baseline for the WHO target, shows low availability and/or poor affordability is resulting in few essential NCD medicines meeting the target in low- and middle-income countries. In the era of Sustainable Development Goals, and as countries work to achieve Universal Health Coverage, increased commitments are needed by governments to improve the situation through the development of evidence-informed, nationally-contextualised interventions, with regular monitoring of NCD medicine availability, patient prices and affordability.

Constraints and challenges in access to insulin: a global perspective.

Substantial attention has been given to the issue of access to medicines for communicable diseases; however, access to essential medicines for diabetes, especially insulin, has had insufficient focus. Although insulin was discovered in 1921, the drug is unattainable to many globally, and this Review aims to highlight the range and complexity of factors that contribute to this unattainability. Manufacturers' selling prices of various insulin formulations and presentations, duties, taxes, mark-ups, and other supply chain costs affect the price of insulin and hence the drug's affordability to health systems and individuals. Unlike drugs for HIV and AIDS, the production of generic or biosimilar insulin has not had an effect on the overall market. Other factors contributing to poor availability of insulin include its quantification at the national level, in-country distribution, and determination of needs at lower levels of the health system. Although insulin is essential for the survival of people with type 1 diabetes and is needed for improved management of diabetes for some people with type 2 diabetes, very little has been done globally to address the issue of access, despite the UN's political commitment to address non-communicable diseases and ensure universal access to drugs for these disorders.

Evaluating availability and price of essential medicines in Boston area (Massachusetts, USA) using WHO/HAI methodology.

BACKGROUND: Many patients even those with health insurance pay out-of-pocket for medicines. We investigated the availability and prices of essential medicines in the Boston area. METHODS: Using the WHO/HAI methodology, availability and undiscounted price data for both originator brand (OB) and lowest price generic (LPG) equivalent versions of 25 essential medicines (14 prescription; 11 over-the-counter (OTC)) were obtained from 17 private pharmacies. The inclusion and prices of 26 essential medicines in seven pharmacy discount programs were also studied. The medicine prices were compared with international reference prices (IRPs). RESULTS: In surveyed pharmacies, the OB medicines were less available as compared to the generics. The OB and LPG versions of OTC medicines were 21.33 and 11.53 times the IRP, respectively. The median prices of prescription medicines were higher, with OB and LPG versions at 158.14 and 38.03 times the IRP, respectively. In studied pharmacy discount programs, the price ratios of surveyed medicines varied from 4.4-13.9. CONCLUSIONS: While noting the WHO target that consumers should pay no more than four times the IRPs, medicine prices were considerably higher in the Boston area. The prices for medicines included in the pharmacy discount programs were closest to WHO's target. Consumers should shop around, as medicine inclusion and prices vary across discount programs. In order for consumers to identify meaningful potential savings through comparison shopping, price transparency is needed.

Comparative assessment of medicine procurement prices in the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

OBJECTIVES: The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), the main primary healthcare provider for 4.9 million Palestinian refugees, spent USD18.3 million on essential medicines dispensed free-of-charge through clinics in five areas of operation ('fields'): Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and the West Bank (2010). Faced with budget contraints and an increasing demand for medicines to treat chronic conditions, the objective of our study was to assess UNRWA's medicine procurement prices to see if savings could be possible. METHODS: In July 2011, data was collected from UNRWA headquarters in Jordan. Price analyses focused on the top 80 medicines by value, accounting for 93% of pharmaceutical expenditure from the General Fund, with comparisons to international, regional and national references. Prices were also compared for the few medicines procured both through UNRWA's central tender (centrally) and by the fields directly (locally). RESULTS: Central procurement prices did not differ markedly from reference prices: median ratios of UNRWA prices to Management Sciences for Health's International Drug Price Indicator Guide, Jordan's Joint Procurement Department, Gulf Cooperation Council, and IDA Foundation bulk packs were 0.99, 1.00, 0.98 and 1.12 respectively. Applying the lowest comparator price to five comparatively higher priced medicines would yield savings of USD1.4 million. Local procurements were generally less cost-effective than central tender procurement, with notable differences across fields and medicines. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, UNRWA's procurement prices were competitive despite the relatively small quantities procured. Regular monitoring of procurement prices and quantities is needed in order to make informed decisions. Our evaluation also underscores the heavy burden of antidiabetic medicines and antimicrobials on UNRWA procurement expenditure.