Pharmaceutical procurement among public sector procurers in CARICOM / Compras farmacéuticas por parte de organismos del sector público de CARICOM / Aquisição de produtos farmacêuticos por compradores do setor público da CARICOM

ABSTRACT Objective. To examine multiple aspects of the medicines in CARICOM procurement markets, including manufacturer headquarters location, regulatory history, and type (innovator versus generic); the proportion of World Health Organization (WHO) essential medicines; and the most expensive medicines procured. Methods. An analysis of procurement information from selected CARICOM procurers. Four public sector procurement lists were obtained based on public availability or sharing of data from public sector procurers. Analyses were based on parameters available or deduced from these data. Results. The majority of products come from manufacturers headquartered in North America and Europe (63%-67%). The percentage of medicines procured from generic companies is 60%-87%; and 25%-50% of medicines procured are on the WHO Essential Medicines List. Wide price variations exist in the most expensive medicines purchased. Conclusions. The analysis identifies vulnerabilities and opportunities in the procurement situation of CARICOM states, particularly related to quality and rational use of medicines. This analysis represents a baseline that governments and other stakeholders can use in the future.

RESUMEN Objetivo. Revisar los múltiples aspectos de los medicamentos en los mercados de compras y los proveedores de CARICOM, como la ubicación de la sede del fabricante, el historial de regulación, el tipo (patentado versus genérico); la proporción de medicamentos esenciales de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS); y los medicamentos comprados más caros. Métodos. Se analizó información sobre la compra por parte de determinados organismos de CARICOM. La información procedía de cuatro listas de organismos del sector público que realizan las compras, que se consiguieron en función de su disponibilidad pública o de los datos distribuidos por los organismos del sector público que realizan las compras. Los análisis estaban basados en los parámetros disponibles o derivados de estos datos. Resultados. La mayoría de los productos proviene de fabricantes radicados en América del Norte y Europa (entre 63% y 67%). El porcentaje de medicamentos que se compra de empresas genéricas oscila entre 60% y 87%; y de 25% a 50% de los medicamentos que se compran están en la Lista de Medicamentos Esenciales de la OMS. Hay una gran divergencia de precios entre los medicamentos comprados más caros. Conclusiones. En el análisis se han encontrado vulnerabilidades y oportunidades con respecto a la situación de las compras de medicamentos de los Estados de CARICOM, especialmente en cuanto a la calidad y al uso racional de los medicamentos. Este análisis representa una línea de base que los gobiernos u otros interesados directos pueden utilizar en el futuro.

RESUMO Objetivo. Examinar vários aspectos relacionados aos mercados e fornecedores de produtos farmacêuticos da CARICOM, incluindo a localização da sede do laboratório fabricante, histórico regulatório e tipo de produtos (inovadores versus genéricos); proporção de medicamentos adquiridos que constam da relação de medicamentos essenciais da Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS); e medicamentos mais caros comprados. Métodos. Foi realizada uma análise de informação sobre compras feitas por compradores selecionados da CARICOM. Quatro listas de compras do setor público foram obtidas com informação de acesso público ou compartilhada pelos compradores. As análises foram feitas com base em parâmetros disponíveis ou inferidos a partir dos dados. Resultados. A maioria dos produtos farmacêuticos é proveniente de laboratórios com sedes na América do Norte e Europa (63%-67%). Do total, 60%-87% dos medicamentos adquiridos são de laboratórios de produtos genéricos e 25%-50% constam da relação de medicamentos essenciais da OMS. Existe uma ampla variação nos preços dos medicamentos mais caros comprados. Conclusões. Foram identificadas fragilidades e oportunidades na situação de compras dos países da CARICOM, em particular relacionadas à qualidade dos produtos e ao uso racional dos medicamentos. Esta análise serve de referência a ser usada futuramente pelos governos e outras partes interessadas.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose improved glycaemic control and 10-year coronary heart disease risk profile of type 2 diabetic patients / 中华医学杂志(英文版)

<p><b>BACKGROUND</b>The debate over the overall benefits of self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 2 diabetes patients is still continuing. We aimed to assess the difference in glycaemic control and coronary heart disease (CHD) risk levels of experimental type 2 diabetes patients provided with facilities for self-monitoring blood glucose and their counterparts without such facilities.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Sixty-one patients who had no prior experience in using glucometers were studied as intervention (n = 30) and control (n = 31) groups. The intervention group was trained in self-monitoring of blood glucose and documentation. Baseline blood glucose and fasting blood glucose were measured and the intervention patients were provided with glucometers and advised to self-monitor their fasting and postprandial blood glucose over six months. The 10-year CHD risk levels were determined with the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study-derived risk engine calculator.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The age and diabetes duration were similar in the two groups (P > 0.05). The majority of the patients were unemployed or retired females with only a primary level education. After 3 months, the haemogolbin A 1C (HbA 1c) levels of the control patients remained unchanged ((7.8 ± 0.3)% vs. (7.9 ± 0.4)%, P > 0.05) whereas the HbA 1c levels of the intervention patients were significantly reduced from the baseline at three ((9.6 ± 0.3)% vs. (7.8 ± 0.3)%, P < 0.001) and six ((9.2 ± 0.4)% vs. (7.5 ± 0.3)%, P < 0.001) months. Interestingly, while the 10-year CHD risk level of the control group remained unchanged after three months, that of the intervention group was remarkably reduced at three and six months from the baseline level ((7.4 ± 1.3)% vs. (4.5 ± 0.9)%, P = 0.056).</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>Self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 2 diabetes patients significantly improved glycaemic control and the CHD risk profile, suggesting that type 2 diabetes patients will potentially benefit from inclusion of glucose meters and testing strips in their health-care package.</p>