The drug classification system, as prescription or non-prescription drug category, has been utilized as a regulatory strategy to ensure patient safety. In Thailand, the same system has been used for decades, though the drug classification criteria were updated to accommodate drug re-classification in 2016. These new criteria, however, have not been applied retroactively. Inconsistency in drug classification has been observed leading to concerns regarding the drug classification system. This has prompted the need for a review of the drug classification system in Thailand. This study aims to explore Thailand and other selected countries' regulatory management regarding the drug classification system, drug classification criteria, and drug classification itself. Methods: The drug classification systems of the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Canada were selected to study alongside Thailand's system. The regulatory review was conducted through each country's drug regulatory agency website and available published research. Complementary interviews with drug regulatory authorities were conducted when written documentation was unclear and had limited access. Fifty-two common drugs were selected to compare their actual classifications across the different countries. Results: All selected countries classified drugs into two major groups: prescription drugs and non-prescription drugs. The studied countries further sub-classified non-prescription drugs into 1-4 categories. Principles of drug classification criteria among countries are similar; they comprised of three themes: disease characteristics, drug safety profile, and other drug characteristics. Actual drug classification of antibiotics, dyslipidemia treatments, and hypertension treatments in Thailand are notedly different from other countries. Furthermore, 77.4% of drugs studied in Thailand fall into the behind-the-counter (dangerous) drug category, which varied from antihistamines to antibiotics, dyslipidemia treatments, and vaccines. Conclusion: Thailand's drug classification criteria are comparable with other nations; however, there is a need to review drug classification statuses as many drugs have been classified into improper drug categories.
No abstract
No abstract
Objectives: The present study was aimed to investigate the availability and price of essential medicines in both public and private health facilities in Indonesia. Methods: The cross-sectional study was carried out using the World Health Organization (WHO) and Health Action International (HAI) methodology. Availability data for 50 medicines of global, regional, and supplementary list of medicines was collected from six health facilities, consisted of public and private hospitals and retail pharmacies in Yogyakarta region. Medicine price ratios were calculated using international reference prices (IRPs). Results: The mean availability of generic essential medicines in public healthcare facilities and private sectors was 76.6% and 60.58%, respectively. Availability of generic medicines was much higher in the public sector. Four medicines had zero availability were atenolol tablet, enalapril tablet, beclometason inhaler, and clotrimazole topical cream. The procurement price in public sector was 0.98, while in private sector was 2.46 times the IRP. Findings of Median MPR of lowestpriced generic (LPG) in the private sector for ceftriaxone was 5.64, ranitidine was 4.35, and salbutamol was 4.19 times higher than international price. In public health facilities, ceftriaxone injection was 2.19 times compared to international price. Conclusions: This study revealed that availability of essential medicines was inadequate, but procurement prices of surveyed medicines were considered efficient, especially in public sector. However, variation in procurement prices of selected medicines was noted. These evidences impose significant policy implications that could help in formulating policies to optimize the access to essential medicines for patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.