METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study using a self-administered questionnaire carried out from September to October 2013. Survey respondents were recruited from 4 divisions in Sarawak: Kuching, Sibu, Miri, and Bintulu.
RESULTS: A total of 433 completed questionnaires were obtained at the end of the study period. All respondents had access to common mass media such as television (89.8%, 389/433), radio (68.6%, 297/433), and the Internet (66.1%, 286/433). Among all respondents, television (71.4%, 309/433) was noted as the most preferred media for drug-related information. Compared with rural respondents, urban respondents were significantly more likely to have access to and prefer the Internet to obtain drug-related information. On the other hand, rural respondents were more likely to have access to and prefer radio for such information compared to their urban counterparts.
CONCLUSIONS: Television can be an important and attractive choice of mass media in a quality use of medicines (QUM) campaign. The Internet can be used to disseminate drug-related information in urban areas, whereas radio can be used in a QUM campaign targeting the rural public.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted between 1st March 2023 and 20th April 2023 among healthcare professionals. A newly designed and validated questionnaire was used. Its face and content validity, along with internal consistency, was adequately established. Convenient sampling was employed to recruit participants for the study. Statistical analysis using one-way ANOVA was performed, considering a p-value
METHODS: A prospective cross-sectional observational study was conducted among the patients admitted to the medical and surgical wards in a public hospital located in Brunei Darussalam between February 2022 and April 2022. Hospitalized adults above 18 years old with regular medications with a minimum length of stay of 48 h and a maximum length of stay of 21 days were included in the study. These eligible patients were divided into a POM group and a non-POM group. The economic analysis of using POM was performed by calculating the direct cost per unit of medication used during admission (from unit-use, ward stock and POM) and comparing the cost spent for both groups. Expired ward stock deemed as medication wastage was determined. Medical research ethics were approved, and all participating patients had given their written informed consent before enrolling in this study.
RESULTS: A total of 112 patients aged 63.2 ± 15.8 years participated in this study. The average cost of medication supplied by the inpatient pharmacy for the non-POM group was USD 21.60 ± 34.20 per patient, whereas, for the POM group, it was approximately USD 13.00 ± 18.30 per patient, with a mean difference of USD 8.60 ± 5.17 per patient (95% CI: -3.95, 27.47, p ≥ 0.05). The use of POM minimized 54.03% (USD 625.04) of the total cost spent by the hospital for the POM group within the period of the study.
CONCLUSION: The pilot study showed that the supplied medication cost per patient was not significantly different between the POM and non-POM groups. Nevertheless, the utilization of POM during hospitalization is capable of reducing at least 50% of the total cost spent on inpatient medications by the hospital. The use of POM during hospitalization also helped in reducing the total time spent on the medication process per patient.
METHODS: Cross-sectional survey design was used for the present study. Pricing data from ten counties including one from South-East Asia, two from Western Pacific and seven from Eastern Mediterranean regions were used in this study. Purchasing power parity (PPP)-adjusted mean unit prices for 26 anti-cancer drug presentations (similar pharmaceutical form, strength, and pack size) were used to compare prices of anti-cancer drugs across three regions. A structured form was used to extract relevant data. Data were entered and analysed using Microsoft Excel®.
RESULTS: Overall, Taiwan had the lowest mean unit prices while Oman had the highest prices. Six (23.1%) and nine (34.6%) drug presentations had a mean unit price below US$100 and between US$100 and US$500 respectively. Eight drug presentations (30.7%) had a mean unit price of more than US$1000 including cabazitaxel with a mean unit price of $17,304.9/vial. There was a direct relationship between income category of the countries and their mean unit price; low-income countries had lower mean unit prices. The average PPP-adjusted unit prices for countries based on their income level were as follows: low middle-income countries (LMICs): US$814.07; high middle income countries (HMICs): US$1150.63; and high income countries (HICs): US$1148.19.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a great variation in pricing of anticancer drugs in selected countires and within their respective regions. These findings will allow policy makers to compare prices of anti-cancer agents with neighbouring countries and develop policies to ensure accessibility and affordability of anti-cancer drugs.