An evaluation of the adequacy of Indian national and state essential medicines lists (EMLs) for palliative care medical needs-a comparative analysis.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES
Essential medicines lists (EMLs) guide the public sector procurement and supply of medications to impact access to adequate and appropriate palliative care drugs. This study evaluates the adequacy of India's national and sub-national EMLs that can directly impact palliative care for 5.4 million patients.
METHODS
In this qualitative document review, we compared Indian national, and state EMLs acquired from official government websites with the International Association for Hospice and Palliative Care (IAHPC) EML recommendations. We analysed data on the indication and formulation of drugs under the different categories of formulations present (all, some and no), and drugs absent. Literature review and inputs from palliative care experts provided alternatives of absent medications to assess the adequacy of lists in managing the symptoms listed by IAPHC.
RESULTS
We analysed 3 national and 27 state lists for 33 recommended drugs. The Central Government Health Services list had the maximum availability of all formulations of drugs (16 [48%]) nationally. Among states and union territories, the Delhi EML was the closest to IAHPC with 17 (52%) drugs with all formulations present. Karnataka had the most incomplete EML with only 3 (9%) drugs with all formulations present. No EML had all the recommended formulations of morphine. In one national and seventeen state EMLs, oral morphine was absent.
CONCLUSION
While Indian EMLs lack drugs for palliative care when compared with the IAHPC EML, symptom management is adequate. There is a need for countries with limited resources to modify the IAPHC list for their settings.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.