scholarly journals Accessibility of Medicines for Children: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhe Chen ◽  
Siyu Li ◽  
Linan Zeng ◽  
Yan Liu ◽  
Miao Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Current Situation ◽  
Survey Method ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
The Public ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Health Action ◽  
Public Sectors ◽  
Medicines For Children

Background: Accessibility of medicines for children is a matter of global concern. Medicines prescribed for children are often off-label. To formulate appropriate policies and undertake necessary interventions to improve access to medicines for children, it is necessary to evaluate the accessibility of medicines for children. However, there is no systematic review of the medicine accessibility for children.Methods: Relevant studies were identified through searching Pubmed, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, World Health Organization website, and Health Action International website. Besides, the references of included studies as a supplementary search were read. We extracted the basic information of articles (the first author, published year, the name of journal, research institution, etc.), the basic study characteristics (survey area, survey time, survey method, survey medicine lists, the number of medicine outlets surveyed, etc.), and the study results (the current situation of the accessibility of medicines for children, including the availability, price, and affordability of medicines for children, etc.). Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted the data. Descriptive analysis methods to analyze the current situation of the accessibility of children’s medicines were used.Results: A total of 18 multicenter cross-sectional studies were included in this systematic review, which were from low-income and middle-income countries. Seventeen studies (17/18, 94.4%) used the WHO/Health Action International (HAI) medicine price methodology to investigate the accessibility of medicines for children. Fifteen studies (15/18, 83.3%) were selected to investigate medicines based on the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines for Children (WHO EMLc). In the public sectors, the availability of originator brands (OBs) ranged from 0 to 52.0%, with a median of 24.2%, and the availability of lowest-priced generics (LPGs) ranged from 17.0 to 72.6%, with a median of 38.1%. In the private sectors, the availability of OBs ranged from 8.9 to 80%, with a median of 21.2%. The availability of LPGs ranged from 20.6 to 72.2%, with a median of 35.9%. In most regions, the availability of OBs in the private sectors was higher than in the public sectors. Collectively, in the price of medicines for children, the median price ratio (MPR) of the OBs in the public sectors and private sectors were much higher than that of the LPGs. And the affordability of the LPGs in the public sectors and private sectors was higher than that of originator brands (OBs).Conclusion: The availability of medicines for children is low in both the public sectors and private sectors in low-income and middle-income countries. The MPR of originator brands (OBs) is higher than that of lowest-priced generics (LPGs), and the most lowest-priced generics (LPGs) have better affordability.

scholarly journals Economics of physical activity in low-income and middle- income countries: a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e037784
Author(s):  
Priyanga Diloshini Ranasinghe ◽  
Subhash Pokhrel ◽  
Nana Kwame Anokye
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Drug Treatment ◽  
Chronic Diseases ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Economic Burden ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries

BackgroundPromotion of physical activity (PA) among populations is a global health investment. However, evidence on economic aspects of PA is sparse and scattered in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to summarise the available evidence on economics of PA in LMICs, identify potential target variables for policy and report gaps in the existing economic evidence alongside research recommendations.Data sourcesA systematic review of the electronic databases (Scopus, Web of Science and SPORTDiscus) and grey literature.Study eligibility criteriaCost-of-illness studies, economic evaluations, interventions and descriptive studies on economic factors associated with PA using preset eligibility criteria.Study appraisal and synthesis of methodsScreening, study selection and quality appraisal based on standard checklists performed by two reviewers with consensus of a third reviewer. Descriptive synthesis of data was performed.ResultsThe majority of the studies were from upper-middle-income countries (n=16, 88.8%) and mainly from Brazil (n=9, 50%). Only one economic evaluation study was found. The focus of the reviewed literature spanned the economic burden of physical inactivity (n=4, 22%), relationship between PA and costs (n=6, 46%) and socioeconomic determinants of PA (n=7, 39%). The findings showed a considerable economic burden due to insufficient PA, with LMICs accounting for 75% of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) globally due to insufficient PA. Socioeconomic correlates of PA were identified, and inverse relationship of PA with the cost of chronic diseases was established. Regular PA along with drug treatment as a treatment scheme for chronic diseases showed advantages with a cost–utility ratio of US$3.21/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) compared with the drug treatment-only group (US$3.92/QALY) by the only economic evaluation conducted in the LMIC, Brazil.LimitationsMeta-analysis was not performed due to heterogeneity of the studies.Conclusions and recommendationsEconomic evaluation studies for PA promotion interventions/strategies and local research from low-income countries are grossly inadequate. Setting economic research agenda in LMICs ought to be prioritised in those areas.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018099856.

scholarly journals Clinical characteristics, treatment and outcomes of paediatric COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. archdischild-2020-321385
Author(s):  
Omar Irfan ◽  
Fiona Muttalib ◽  
Kun Tang ◽  
Li Jiang ◽  
Zohra S Lassi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Disease Severity ◽  
World Bank ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Income Level ◽  
Clinical Findings ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries

ObjectiveCompare paediatric COVID-19 disease characteristics, management and outcomes according to World Bank country income level and disease severity.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.SettingBetween 1 December 2019 and 8 January 2021, 3350 articles were identified. Two reviewers conducted study screening, data abstraction and quality assessment independently and in duplicate. Observational studies describing laboratory-confirmed paediatric (0–19 years old) COVID-19 were considered for inclusion.Main outcomes and measuresThe pooled proportions of clinical findings, treatment and outcomes were compared according to World Bank country income level and reported disease severity.Results129 studies were included from 31 countries comprising 10 251 children of which 57.4% were hospitalised. Mean age was 7.0 years (SD 3.6), and 27.1% had a comorbidity. Fever (63.3%) and cough (33.7%) were common. Of 3670 cases, 44.1% had radiographic abnormalities. The majority of cases recovered (88.9%); however, 96 hospitalised children died. Compared with high-income countries, in low-income and middle-income countries, a lower proportion of cases were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) (9.9% vs 26.0%) yet pooled proportion of deaths among hospitalised children was higher (relative risk 2.14, 95% CI 1.43 to 3.20). Children with severe disease received antimicrobials, inotropes and anti-inflammatory agents more frequently than those with non-severe disease. Subgroup analyses showed that a higher proportion of children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) were admitted to ICU (47.1% vs 22.9%) and a higher proportion of hospitalised children with MIS-C died (4.8% vs 3.6%) compared with the overall sample.ConclusionPaediatric COVID-19 has a favourable prognosis. Further severe disease characterisation in children is needed globally.

scholarly journals Outcomes of HIV treatment from the private sector in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. e031844
Author(s):  
Gitau Mburu ◽  
Ewemade Igbinedion ◽  
Sin How Lim ◽  
Aung Zayar Paing ◽  
Siyan Yi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Private Sector ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Hiv Treatment ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Publication Date ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Secondary Outcomes

IntroductionPrivate sector provision of HIV treatment is increasing in low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC). However, there is limited documentation of its outcomes. This protocol reports a proposed systematic review that will synthesise clinical outcomes of private sector HIV treatment in LMIC.Methods and analysisThis review will be conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analyses protocols. Primary outcomes will include: (1) proportion of eligible patients initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART); (2) proportion of those on ART with <1000 copies/mL; (3) rate of all-cause mortality among ART recipients. Secondary outcomes will include: (1) proportion receivingPneumocystis jirovecipneumonia prophylaxis; (2) proportion with >90% ART adherence (based on any measure reported); (3) proportion screened for non-communicable diseases (specifically cervical cancer, diabetes, hypertension and mental ill health); (iv) proportion screened for tuberculosis. A search of five electronic bibliographical databases (Embase, Medline, PsychINFO, Web of Science and CINAHL) and reference lists of included articles will be conducted to identify relevant articles reporting HIV clinical outcomes. Searches will be limited to LMIC. No age, publication date, study-design or language limits will be applied. Authors of relevant studies will be contacted for clarification. Two reviewers will independently screen citations and abstracts, identify full text articles for inclusion, extract data and appraise the quality and bias of included studies. Outcome data will be pooled to generate aggregative proportions of primary and secondary outcomes. Descriptive statistics and a narrative synthesis will be presented. Heterogeneity and sensitivity assessments will be conducted to aid interpretation of results.Ethics and disseminationThe results of this review will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed scientific manuscript and at international scientific conferences. Results will inform quality improvement strategies, replication of identified good practices, potential policy changes, and future research.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42016040053.

scholarly journals Health promotion at the workplace setting: a protocol for a systematic review of effectiveness and sustainability of current practice in low-income and middle-income countries

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. e027050
Author(s):  
Mary Njeri Wanjau ◽  
Belen Zapata-Diomedi ◽  
Lennert Veerman
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Promotion ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Workplace Health Promotion ◽  
The Body ◽  
Workplace Health ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Workplace Setting

IntroductionLow-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) are experiencing a growing disease burden due to non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Changing behavioural practices, such as diets high in saturated fat, salt and sugar and sedentary lifestyles, have been associated with the increase in NCDs. Health promotion at the workplace setting is considered effective in the fight against NCDs and has been reported to yield numerous benefits. However, there is a need to generate evidence on the effectiveness and sustainability of workplace health promotion practice specific to LMICs. We aim to synthesise the current literature on workplace health promotion in LMICs focusing on interventions effectiveness and sustainability.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a systematic review of published studies from LMICs up to 31 March 2019. We will search the following databases: EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest and CINAHL. Two reviewers will independently screen potential articles for inclusion and disagreements will be resolved by consensus. We will appraise the quality and risk of bias of included studies using two tools from the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. We will present a narrative overview and assessment of the body of evidence derived from the comprehensive review of the studies. The reported outcomes will be summarised by study design, duration, intensity/frequency of intervention delivery and by the six-priority health promotion action areas set out in the Ottawa Charter. We will conduct a thematic analysis to identify the focus areas of current interventions. This systematic review protocol has been prepared according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta- analyses for Protocols 2015 statement.Ethics and disseminationThis study does not require ethics approval. We will disseminate the results of this review through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.Trial registration numberCRD42018110853.

Coprevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus and tuberculosis in low-income and middle-income countries: A systematic review

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. e3066 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah Stowe McMurry ◽  
Emily Mendenhall ◽  
Aravind Rajendrakumar ◽  
Lavanya Nambiar ◽  
Srinath Satyanarayana ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document