Identifying market risk for substandard and falsified medicines: An analytic framework based on qualitative research in China, Indonesia, Turkey and Romania

Elizabeth Pisani, Adina Loredana Nistor, Amalia Hasnida, Koray Parmaksiz, Jingying Xu, Maarten Oliver Kok

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Introduction: Substandard and falsified medicines undermine health systems. We sought to unravel the political and economic factors which drive the production of these products, and to explain how they reach patients. Methods: We conducted in-depth case studies in China, Indonesia, Turkey and Romania. We reviewed academic papers and press reports (n = 840), developing semi-structured questionnaires. We interviewed regulators, policy-makers, pharmaceutical manufacturers, physicians, pharmacists, patients and academics (n=88). We coded data using NVivo software, and developed an analytic framework to assess national risks for substandard and falsified medicines. We tested the framework against cases reported to the World Health Organization, from countries at all income levels. Results: We found that increasing political commitment to provision of universal health coverage has led to public procurement policies aimed at lowering prices of medical products. In response, legitimate, profit-driven pharmaceutical companies protect their margins by cutting costs, or withdrawing from less profitable markets, while distributors engage in arbitrage. Meanwhile, health providers sometimes protect profits by 'upselling' patients to medicines not covered by insurers. Cost-cutting can undermine quality assurance, leading to substandard or degraded medicines. Other responses contribute to shortages, irrational demand and high prices. All of these provide market opportunities for producers of falsified products; they also push consumers outside of the regular supply chain, providing falsifiers with easy access to customers. The analytic framework capturing these interactions explained cases in most high and middle-income settings; additional factors operate in the poorest countries. Conclusions: Most efforts to secure medicine quality currently focus on product regulation. However, our research suggests market mechanisms are key drivers for poor quality medicines, including where political commitments to universal health coverage are under-resourced. We have developed a framework to guide country-specific, system-wide analysis. This can flag risks and pinpoint specific actions to protect medicine quality, and thus health.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-25
Number of pages25
JournalWellcome Open Research
Volume4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 16 Apr 2019

Fingerprint

Romania
Indonesia
Qualitative Research
Turkey
Medicine
China
Health
Universal Coverage
Costs and Cost Analysis
Insurance Carriers
Profitability
Politics
Public Policy
Marketing
Administrative Personnel
Pharmacists
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Software
Economics
Quality assurance

Keywords

  • Counterifeit medicine
  • Falsified medicine
  • LMIC
  • Medicine quality
  • Procurement
  • Substandard medicine

Cite this

@article{3de3e6999e854c84beeaeba435b41fb1,
title = "Identifying market risk for substandard and falsified medicines: An analytic framework based on qualitative research in China, Indonesia, Turkey and Romania",
abstract = "Introduction: Substandard and falsified medicines undermine health systems. We sought to unravel the political and economic factors which drive the production of these products, and to explain how they reach patients. Methods: We conducted in-depth case studies in China, Indonesia, Turkey and Romania. We reviewed academic papers and press reports (n = 840), developing semi-structured questionnaires. We interviewed regulators, policy-makers, pharmaceutical manufacturers, physicians, pharmacists, patients and academics (n=88). We coded data using NVivo software, and developed an analytic framework to assess national risks for substandard and falsified medicines. We tested the framework against cases reported to the World Health Organization, from countries at all income levels. Results: We found that increasing political commitment to provision of universal health coverage has led to public procurement policies aimed at lowering prices of medical products. In response, legitimate, profit-driven pharmaceutical companies protect their margins by cutting costs, or withdrawing from less profitable markets, while distributors engage in arbitrage. Meanwhile, health providers sometimes protect profits by 'upselling' patients to medicines not covered by insurers. Cost-cutting can undermine quality assurance, leading to substandard or degraded medicines. Other responses contribute to shortages, irrational demand and high prices. All of these provide market opportunities for producers of falsified products; they also push consumers outside of the regular supply chain, providing falsifiers with easy access to customers. The analytic framework capturing these interactions explained cases in most high and middle-income settings; additional factors operate in the poorest countries. Conclusions: Most efforts to secure medicine quality currently focus on product regulation. However, our research suggests market mechanisms are key drivers for poor quality medicines, including where political commitments to universal health coverage are under-resourced. We have developed a framework to guide country-specific, system-wide analysis. This can flag risks and pinpoint specific actions to protect medicine quality, and thus health.",
keywords = "Counterifeit medicine, Falsified medicine, LMIC, Medicine quality, Procurement, Substandard medicine",
author = "Elizabeth Pisani and Nistor, {Adina Loredana} and Amalia Hasnida and Koray Parmaksiz and Jingying Xu and Kok, {Maarten Oliver}",
year = "2019",
month = "4",
day = "16",
doi = "10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15236.1",
language = "English",
volume = "4",
pages = "1--25",
journal = "Wellcome Open Research",
issn = "2398-502X",
publisher = "F1000Research",

}

Identifying market risk for substandard and falsified medicines : An analytic framework based on qualitative research in China, Indonesia, Turkey and Romania. / Pisani, Elizabeth; Nistor, Adina Loredana; Hasnida, Amalia; Parmaksiz, Koray; Xu, Jingying; Kok, Maarten Oliver.

In: Wellcome Open Research, Vol. 4, 16.04.2019, p. 1-25.

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Identifying market risk for substandard and falsified medicines

T2 - An analytic framework based on qualitative research in China, Indonesia, Turkey and Romania

AU - Pisani, Elizabeth

AU - Nistor, Adina Loredana

AU - Hasnida, Amalia

AU - Parmaksiz, Koray

AU - Xu, Jingying

AU - Kok, Maarten Oliver

PY - 2019/4/16

Y1 - 2019/4/16

N2 - Introduction: Substandard and falsified medicines undermine health systems. We sought to unravel the political and economic factors which drive the production of these products, and to explain how they reach patients. Methods: We conducted in-depth case studies in China, Indonesia, Turkey and Romania. We reviewed academic papers and press reports (n = 840), developing semi-structured questionnaires. We interviewed regulators, policy-makers, pharmaceutical manufacturers, physicians, pharmacists, patients and academics (n=88). We coded data using NVivo software, and developed an analytic framework to assess national risks for substandard and falsified medicines. We tested the framework against cases reported to the World Health Organization, from countries at all income levels. Results: We found that increasing political commitment to provision of universal health coverage has led to public procurement policies aimed at lowering prices of medical products. In response, legitimate, profit-driven pharmaceutical companies protect their margins by cutting costs, or withdrawing from less profitable markets, while distributors engage in arbitrage. Meanwhile, health providers sometimes protect profits by 'upselling' patients to medicines not covered by insurers. Cost-cutting can undermine quality assurance, leading to substandard or degraded medicines. Other responses contribute to shortages, irrational demand and high prices. All of these provide market opportunities for producers of falsified products; they also push consumers outside of the regular supply chain, providing falsifiers with easy access to customers. The analytic framework capturing these interactions explained cases in most high and middle-income settings; additional factors operate in the poorest countries. Conclusions: Most efforts to secure medicine quality currently focus on product regulation. However, our research suggests market mechanisms are key drivers for poor quality medicines, including where political commitments to universal health coverage are under-resourced. We have developed a framework to guide country-specific, system-wide analysis. This can flag risks and pinpoint specific actions to protect medicine quality, and thus health.

AB - Introduction: Substandard and falsified medicines undermine health systems. We sought to unravel the political and economic factors which drive the production of these products, and to explain how they reach patients. Methods: We conducted in-depth case studies in China, Indonesia, Turkey and Romania. We reviewed academic papers and press reports (n = 840), developing semi-structured questionnaires. We interviewed regulators, policy-makers, pharmaceutical manufacturers, physicians, pharmacists, patients and academics (n=88). We coded data using NVivo software, and developed an analytic framework to assess national risks for substandard and falsified medicines. We tested the framework against cases reported to the World Health Organization, from countries at all income levels. Results: We found that increasing political commitment to provision of universal health coverage has led to public procurement policies aimed at lowering prices of medical products. In response, legitimate, profit-driven pharmaceutical companies protect their margins by cutting costs, or withdrawing from less profitable markets, while distributors engage in arbitrage. Meanwhile, health providers sometimes protect profits by 'upselling' patients to medicines not covered by insurers. Cost-cutting can undermine quality assurance, leading to substandard or degraded medicines. Other responses contribute to shortages, irrational demand and high prices. All of these provide market opportunities for producers of falsified products; they also push consumers outside of the regular supply chain, providing falsifiers with easy access to customers. The analytic framework capturing these interactions explained cases in most high and middle-income settings; additional factors operate in the poorest countries. Conclusions: Most efforts to secure medicine quality currently focus on product regulation. However, our research suggests market mechanisms are key drivers for poor quality medicines, including where political commitments to universal health coverage are under-resourced. We have developed a framework to guide country-specific, system-wide analysis. This can flag risks and pinpoint specific actions to protect medicine quality, and thus health.

KW - Counterifeit medicine

KW - Falsified medicine

KW - LMIC

KW - Medicine quality

KW - Procurement

KW - Substandard medicine

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85066091879&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85066091879&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15236.1

DO - 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15236.1

M3 - Article

VL - 4

SP - 1

EP - 25

JO - Wellcome Open Research

JF - Wellcome Open Research

SN - 2398-502X

ER -