Table 2 Comparison of the proportion (%) of countries that attained a particular policy or indicator in low, mid and high income countries by 2007 [30]
From: The current status and trend of clinical pharmacology in developing countries
WHO-countries income category | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Parameter/Indicator | Low income | Mid-income | High income |
1. National Medicine Policy (NMP) | 94% | 84% | 74% |
Monitoring: Undertook assessment/audit of: | |||
• National assessment of NMP | 80% | 65% | 81% |
• Pharmaceutical/Drug situation | 37% | 48% | 69% |
• Prescriptions audit | 39% | 46% | 71% |
• Access | 50% | 52% | 72% |
2. Drug Regulatory Authority (DRA) | 89% | 85% | 97% |
• Marketing authorization of Medicines | 88% | 84% | 94% |
• Licensing of manuf., imp./expt. (av.) | 91% | 91% | 99% |
• Licensing of prescribers & pharmacies | 94% | 99% | 100% |
• Pharmacovigilance (ADR) | 50% | 64% | 67% |
• Quality control system in place | 68% | 69% | 96% |
3. Access to essential medicines: patients within 1-hr walking distance to a clinic, 2003 | |||
• Very low Access (< 50%) | 31% | 6% | 0% |
• Low-Medium access (50 – 80%) | 56% | 38% | 25% |
• Medium-High access (81-95%) | 10% | 31% | 0% |
• Very high Access (< 95%) | 2% | 25% | 75% |
4. Medicine financing and/or pricing policy | 93% | 100% | 100% |
i) With health insurance policy? Medicines received for free: | |||
• All medicines | 35% | 59% | 55% |
• Malaria medicines | 59% | 72% | 47% |
• Tuberculosis medicines | 100% | 92% | 94% |
ii) Monitoring medicine retail prices: | |||
• Public sector | 40% | 58% | 77% |
• Private sector | 36% | 49% | 78% |
• NGO sector | 17% | 33% | 71% |
5. Medicines supply policy | |||
• Procurement policy for Ess. Meds | 74% | 90% | 92% |
6. Production and sale of medicines | |||
• R&D of new active substances | 16% | 27% | 57% |
• Repackaging of finished dos-forms | 83% | 78% | 81% |
• National legislation + TRIPS | 55% | 76% | 86% |
7. Rational use of medicines | |||