Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters

Affiliation country
Publication year range
1.
Article in Spanish | PAHO-IRIS | ID: phr-59255

ABSTRACT

[RESUMEN]. Objetivo. Identificar y analizar los incidentes de productos médicos subestándares, falsificados, no registrados y robados al inicio de la pandemia de COVID-19. Métodos. Búsqueda detallada en los sitios web de las autoridades reguladoras de las Américas. Identificación de los incidentes de medicamentos y dispositivos médicos (incluidos los de diagnóstico in vitro) subestándares falsificados, no registrados y robados. Se determinaron los tipos de productos, las etapas de la cadena de suministro en las que se detectaron y las medidas tomadas por las autoridades. Resultados. Se identificaron 1 273 incidentes en 15 países (1 087 productos subestándares, 44 falsificados, 123 no registrados y 19 robados). La mayor cantidad de incidentes corresponden a dispositivos médicos, desinfectantes y antisépticos. El punto en la cadena de suministro con mayor frecuencia de informes fue la adquisición a través de internet. Las medidas tomadas por las autoridades reguladoras corresponden en su mayoría a: alerta, prohibición de uso, prohibición de publicidad y fabricación, retiro del mercado y seguimiento de eventos adversos. Conclusiones. Se evidenció un número destacable de incidentes de productos médicos subestándares, falsificados, no registrados y robados al inicio de la pandemia por COVID-19. La escasez de insumos, la flexibilización en los requisitos regulatorios y el aumento de la demanda son factores que pueden favorecer el incremento del número de incidentes. Las autoridades reguladoras nacionales de referencia presentaron mayores frecuencias de detección de incidentes y de aplicación de medidas sanitarias. Se observó que se debe abordar el canal de venta por internet con alguna estrategia reguladora para garantizar la distribución segura de productos médicos.


[ABSTRACT]. Objective. Identify and analyze incidents of substandard, falsified, unregistered, and stolen medical products at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods. Detailed search of the websites of regulatory authorities in the Americas. Identification of incidents of substandard, falsified, unregistered, and stolen medicines and medical devices (including in vitro diagnostics). The types of products were determined, as were the stages in the supply chain where they were detected, and the actions taken by authorities. Results. A total of 1 273 incidents were identified in 15 countries (1 087 substandard, 44 falsified, 123 unreg- istered, and 19 stolen products). The largest number of incidents involved medical devices, disinfectants, and antiseptics. The most frequently reported point in the supply chain was online purchasing. The principal measures taken by the regulatory authorities were: alerts, prohibition of use, prohibition of advertising and manufacture, recall, and monitoring of adverse events. Conclusions. A substantial number of incidents involving substandard, falsified, unregistered, and stolen medical products at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic were identified. Shortages of supplies, easing of regulatory requirements, and increased demand are factors that may have led to an increase in the number of incidents. The national regulatory authorities of reference reported more frequent detection of incidents and more frequent application of health measures. A regulatory strategy is needed in order to address online sales and ensure the safe distribution of medical products.


[RESUMO]. Objetivo. Identificar e analisar incidentes de produtos médicos abaixo do padrão, falsificados, não registrados e roubados no início da pandemia de COVID-19. Métodos. Foi realizada uma busca detalhada nos sites das autoridades reguladoras das Américas. Foram identificados incidentes envolvendo medicamentos e dispositivos médicos (incluindo para diagnóstico in vitro) abaixo do padrão, falsificados, não registrados e roubados. Foram determinados os tipos de produtos, os estágios da cadeia de abastecimento em que foram detectados e as medidas tomadas pelas autoridades. Resultados. Foram identificados 1 273 incidentes em 15 países (1 087 produtos abaixo do padrão, 44 falsificados, 123 não registrados e 19 roubados). O maior número de incidentes estava relacionado a dispositivos médicos, desinfetantes e antissépticos. O ponto na cadeia de abastecimento com a maior frequência de relatos foi a de aquisição pela internet. As medidas tomadas pelas autoridades reguladoras foram principalmente alertas, proibições de uso, proibições de publicidade e fabricação, recolhimento de produtos do mercado e monitoramento de eventos adversos. Conclusões. Houve um número significativo de incidentes envolvendo produtos médicos abaixo do padrão falsificados, não registrados e roubados no início da pandemia de COVID-19. A escassez de insumos, a flexibilização das exigências regulatórias e o aumento da demanda são fatores que podem levar a um maior número de incidentes. As autoridades reguladoras nacionais de referência informaram um aumento na frequência de detecção de incidentes e implementação de medidas sanitárias. O canal de vendas pela internet precisa ser abordado com alguma estratégia regulatória para garantir a distribuição segura de produtos médicos.


Subject(s)
Counterfeit Drugs , Substandard Drugs , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Pharmaceutical Trade , Pharmaceutical Preparations , Americas , Counterfeit Drugs , Substandard Drugs , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Pharmaceutical Trade , Homeopathic Vehicles , Americas , Substandard Drugs , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Pharmaceutical Trade , Homeopathic Vehicles
2.
PLoS Negl Trop Dis ; 15(9): e0009360, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34591844

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Post-market surveillance is a key regulatory function to prevent substandard and falsified (SF) medicines from being consumed by patients. Field deployable technologies offer the potential for rapid objective screening for SF medicines. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We evaluated twelve devices: three near infrared spectrometers (MicroPHAZIR RX, NIR-S-G1, Neospectra 2.5), two Raman spectrometers (Progeny, TruScan RM), one mid-infrared spectrometer (4500a), one disposable colorimetric assay (Paper Analytical Devices, PAD), one disposable immunoassay (Rapid Diagnostic Test, RDT), one portable liquid chromatograph (C-Vue), one microfluidic system (PharmaChk), one mass spectrometer (QDa), and one thin layer chromatography kit (GPHF-Minilab). Each device was tested with a series of field collected medicines (FCM) along with simulated medicines (SIM) formulated in a laboratory. The FCM and SIM ranged from samples with good quality active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) concentrations, reduced concentrations of API (80% and 50% of the API), no API, and the wrong API. All the devices had high sensitivities (91.5 to 100.0%) detecting medicines with no API or the wrong API. However, the sensitivities of each device towards samples with 50% and 80% API varied greatly, from 0% to 100%. The infrared and Raman spectrometers had variable sensitivities for detecting samples with 50% and 80% API (from 5.6% to 50.0%). The devices with the ability to quantitate API (C-Vue, PharmaChk, QDa) had sensitivities ranging from 91.7% to 100% to detect all poor quality samples. The specificity was lower for the quantitative C-Vue, PharmaChk, & QDa (50.0% to 91.7%) than for all the other devices in this study (95.5% to 100%). CONCLUSIONS: The twelve devices evaluated could detect medicines with the wrong or none of the APIs, consistent with falsified medicines, with high accuracy. However, API quantitation to detect formulations similar to those commonly found in substandards proved more difficult, requiring further technological innovation.


Subject(s)
Chemistry Techniques, Analytical/instrumentation , Chemistry Techniques, Analytical/methods , Counterfeit Drugs/analysis , Drug Evaluation, Preclinical/instrumentation , Substandard Drugs/analysis , Drug Evaluation, Preclinical/methods , Lab-On-A-Chip Devices , Quality Control , Sensitivity and Specificity
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL