Evaluation of Rational Medicines Use Based on World Health Organization Core Indicators: A Cross-Sectional Study in Five Health Districts in Mauritania.

IF 2.1 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice Pub Date : 2024-03-28 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/IPRP.S447664
Mohamed Ali Ag Ahmed, Raffaella Ravinetto, Khadijetou Diop, Verónica Trasancos Buitrago, Catherine Dujardin
{"title":"Evaluation of Rational Medicines Use Based on World Health Organization Core Indicators: A Cross-Sectional Study in Five Health Districts in Mauritania.","authors":"Mohamed Ali Ag Ahmed, Raffaella Ravinetto, Khadijetou Diop, Verónica Trasancos Buitrago, Catherine Dujardin","doi":"10.2147/IPRP.S447664","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The rational use of medicines is essential for preventing adverse medicine reactions, achieving therapeutic outcomes, and optimizing treatment costs. While the irrational use of medicines is frequently reported in sub-Saharan Africa, to the best of our knowledge no formal studies have taken place in Mauritania thus far. The main objective of this study was therefore to analyze the rational use of medicines in public and private not-for-profit health facilities, in five health districts in Mauritania.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional study to assess the rational use of medicines. We used the standard indicators derived from the methodologies of the World Health Organization (WHO) and International Network for Rational Use of Drugs (INRUD). Data were prospectively collected from 1050 prescriptions/patients, in thirty-one public and private not-for-profit health posts/centers in 5 health districts. The data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. P value less than 0.05 at 95% confidence interval considered for significance of relationships for associations in statistical test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average number of medicines per prescription was 2.21; 83.1% (1931/2325) of medicines were prescribed by generic name, but only 54% (1253/2325) were on the National Essential Medicine List (NEML). Antibiotics were prescribed in 62.4% (655/1050) of the consultations, and injectable medicines were prescribed in 15.6% (164/1050) of the consultations. The average consultation time was 16.32 minutes, and the average dispensing time was 97 seconds. Dispensed medicines were correctly labeled, and 83% (871/1050) of patients met the correct administration schedule. The NEML, and the \"restricted NEML\" for 76 commonly-used medicines, were available in all surveyed health facilities, but the National Therapeutic Guidelines were available in only 60.26% of them.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings indicate a possible excess of antibiotics prescriptions, and a likely lack of knowledge of the National Therapeutic Guidelines. There is a need to investigate in more detail the prescription patterns versus disease-specific therapeutic guidelines, and to qualitatively investigate the factors that contribute to the observed irrational prescribing. Moreover, training local staff in the rational use of medicines seems important.</p>","PeriodicalId":45655,"journal":{"name":"Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice","volume":"13 ","pages":"17-29"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10984847/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/IPRP.S447664","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The rational use of medicines is essential for preventing adverse medicine reactions, achieving therapeutic outcomes, and optimizing treatment costs. While the irrational use of medicines is frequently reported in sub-Saharan Africa, to the best of our knowledge no formal studies have taken place in Mauritania thus far. The main objective of this study was therefore to analyze the rational use of medicines in public and private not-for-profit health facilities, in five health districts in Mauritania.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study to assess the rational use of medicines. We used the standard indicators derived from the methodologies of the World Health Organization (WHO) and International Network for Rational Use of Drugs (INRUD). Data were prospectively collected from 1050 prescriptions/patients, in thirty-one public and private not-for-profit health posts/centers in 5 health districts. The data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. P value less than 0.05 at 95% confidence interval considered for significance of relationships for associations in statistical test.

Results: The average number of medicines per prescription was 2.21; 83.1% (1931/2325) of medicines were prescribed by generic name, but only 54% (1253/2325) were on the National Essential Medicine List (NEML). Antibiotics were prescribed in 62.4% (655/1050) of the consultations, and injectable medicines were prescribed in 15.6% (164/1050) of the consultations. The average consultation time was 16.32 minutes, and the average dispensing time was 97 seconds. Dispensed medicines were correctly labeled, and 83% (871/1050) of patients met the correct administration schedule. The NEML, and the "restricted NEML" for 76 commonly-used medicines, were available in all surveyed health facilities, but the National Therapeutic Guidelines were available in only 60.26% of them.

Conclusion: Our findings indicate a possible excess of antibiotics prescriptions, and a likely lack of knowledge of the National Therapeutic Guidelines. There is a need to investigate in more detail the prescription patterns versus disease-specific therapeutic guidelines, and to qualitatively investigate the factors that contribute to the observed irrational prescribing. Moreover, training local staff in the rational use of medicines seems important.

基于世界卫生组织核心指标的合理用药评估:毛里塔尼亚五个卫生区的横断面研究。
导言:合理用药对于预防药品不良反应、达到治疗效果和优化治疗成本至关重要。虽然撒哈拉以南非洲地区经常有不合理用药的报道,但据我们所知,毛里塔尼亚迄今为止尚未开展过正式研究。因此,本研究的主要目的是分析毛里塔尼亚五个卫生区的公立和私立非营利性医疗机构的合理用药情况:我们进行了一项横断面研究,以评估合理用药情况。我们使用的标准指标源自世界卫生组织(WHO)和国际合理用药网络(INRUD)的方法。我们在 5 个卫生区的 31 家公立和私立非营利性卫生站/中心收集了 1050 份处方/患者数据。数据使用社会科学统计软件包进行分析。在 95% 的置信区间内,P 值小于 0.05 即为统计检验中关联关系的显著性:每张处方的平均药品数量为 2.21 种;83.1%(1931/2325)的处方药使用了通用名,但只有 54%(1253/2325)的处方药列入了《国家基本药物目录》(NEML)。62.4%(655/1050)的会诊处方为抗生素,15.6%(164/1050)的会诊处方为注射剂。平均问诊时间为 16.32 分钟,平均配药时间为 97 秒。配发的药品标签正确无误,83%(871/1050)的患者符合正确的用药时间表。在所有接受调查的医疗机构中,都有国家药品标识和 76 种常用药品的 "限制性国家药品标识",但只有 60.26% 的医疗机构有《国家治疗指南》:结论:我们的调查结果表明,抗生素处方可能过多,而且可能缺乏对《国家治疗指南》的了解。有必要更详细地调查处方模式与特定疾病治疗指南的对比情况,并定性地调查造成所观察到的不合理处方的因素。此外,对当地工作人员进行合理用药培训似乎也很重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
3.40%
发文量
29
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信