A proposed analytical framework for qualitative evaluation of access to medicines from a health systems perspective.

OBJECTIVE: Despite global recognition that access to medicines is shaped by various interacting processes within a health system, a suitable analytical framework for identifying barriers and facilitators from a system's perspective was needed. We propose a framework specifically designed to find drivers to access to medicines from a country's health system perspective. This framework could enable the systematic evaluation of access across countries, disease areas and populations and facilitate targeted policy development. This framework is the byproduct of a larger study on the barriers and facilitators to childhood oncology medicines in South Africa. RESULTS: Eight core (pharmaceutical) functional processes were identified from existing frameworks: (I) medicine regulation, (II) public financing and pricing, (III) selection, (IV) reimbursement, (V) procurement and supply, (VI) healthcare delivery, (VII) dispensing and (VIII) use. National contextual components included policy and legislation and health information systems. To emphasize the interlinkage of processes, the proposed framework was structured as a pharmaceutical value chain. This framework focusses on national processes that are within a country's control as opposed to global factors, and functional mechanisms versus a country's performance or policy objectives. Further refinement and validation of the framework following application in other contexts is encouraged.

The caregiver's experience of childhood cancer treatment in South Africa.

Background: This study explored the treatment-related, financial and psychological experiences of caregivers during cancer treatment of their children in South Africa's (SA) public and private sectors. Methods: In this exploratory study, three focus groups were conducted with caregivers of children undergoing cancer treatment in SA's public healthcare sector. A fourth small focus group with two parents in the private sector was conducted online. A mixed-methods approach was employed using a combination of thematic analysis and grounded theory. Results: Of the 20 public sector caregivers, many expressed frustration at the number of visits to primary healthcare clinics before being referred. Caregivers had difficulties coping with and accepting the diagnosis, alongside managing continued care for the child and other children at home. Support received by family and community members was varied. Financial strain was an important concern. The two private sector parents indicated greater levels of support and no financial hardship, but expressed similar levels of emotional stress. Conclusion: These caregiver experiences indicate that improvements are urgently needed in the recognition of childhood cancer symptoms at primary healthcare level in SA. They also highlight a need for increased financial support from government through social grants, travel allowances and nutritional support.

SDG indicator 3.b.3 - an analysis of its robustness and challenges for measuring access to medicines for children.

BACKGROUND: Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicator 3.b.3 monitors progress in medicines' accessibility for adults and has significant limitations when applying to medicines for children. An adapted indicator methodology was developed to fill this gap, but no proof of its robustness exists. We provide this evidence through sensitivity analyses. METHODS: Data on availability and prices of child medicines from ten historical datasets were combined to create datasets for analysis: Dataset 1 (medicines selected at random) and Dataset 2 (preference given to available medicines, to better capture affordability of medicines). A base case scenario and univariate sensitivity analyses were performed to test critical components of the methodology, including the new variable of number of units needed for treatment (NUNT), disease burden (DB) weighting, and the National Poverty Line (NPL) limits. Additional analyses were run on a continuously smaller basket of medicines to explore the minimum number of medicines required. Mean facility scores for access were calculated and compared. RESULTS: The mean facility score for Dataset 1 and Dataset 2 within the base case scenario was 35.5% (range 8.0-58.8%) and 76.3% (range 57.2-90.6%). Different NUNT scenarios led to limited variations in mean facility scores of + 0.1% and -0.2%, or differences of + 4.4% and -2.1% at the more critical NPL of $5.50 (Dataset 1). For Dataset 2, variations to the NUNT generated differences of + 0.0% and -0.6%, at an NPL of $5.50 the differences were + 5.0 and -2.0%. Different approaches for weighting for DB induced considerable fluctuations of 9.0% and 11.2% respectively. Stable outcomes with less than 5% change in mean facility score were observed for a medicine basket down to 12 medicines. For smaller baskets, scores increased more rapidly with a widening range. CONCLUSION: This study has confirmed that the proposed adaptations to make SDG indicator 3.b.3 appropriate for children are robust, indicating that they could be an important addition to the official Global Indicator Framework. At least 12 child-appropriate medicines should be surveyed to obtain meaningful outcomes. General concerns that remain about the weighting of medicines for DB and the NPL should be considered at the 2025 planned review of this framework.