Relation between opioid consumption and inclusion of opioids in 137 national essential medicines lists.

Opioids are deemed essential medicines by the World Health Organization (WHO). However, many countries have inadequate access to them. Whether including opioids in national essential medicines lists (EMLs) influences national opioid consumption has not been evaluated. We conducted a cross-sectional study to determine whether the listing of opioids in national EMLs was associated with consumption. We quantified the numbers and types of all opioids included in 137 national EMLs, for comparison with opioids in the WHO's Model List of Essential Medicines. Using the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) consumption statistics for 2015-2017, we assessed the relation between annual mean opioid consumption (mg/person) and the numbers of opioids included in EMLs, controlling for region, population, healthcare expenditure, life expectancy, gross domestic product, human development and corruption. Five opioids were included in the 20th edition of the WHO's Model List of Essential Medicines: codeine, fentanyl, loperamide, methadone and morphine. On average, countries' lists included significantly (p<0.05) more opioids than the WHO's Model List. However, there were wide variations in the numbers (median 6 opioids; IQR: 5-9) and types (n=33) of opioids included in national EMLs. Morphine (95%), fentanyl (83%) and codeine (69%) were the most commonly included opioids. Most national EMLs were out of date (median publication date: 2011, IQR: 2009-2013). After adjusting for country characteristics, there was no relation between mean opioid consumption and the number of opioids in EMLs. Including opioids in national EMLs was not associated with consumption. National EMLs should be regularly updated to reflect the availability of opioids and the populations' needs for managing pain.

Richards GC ，Aronson JK ，Heneghan C ，Mahtani KR ，Koshiaris C ，Persaud N ... -  《BMJ Global Health》

Comparison of essential medicines lists in 137 countries.

Persaud N ，Jiang M ，Shaikh R ，Bali A ，Oronsaye E ，Woods H ，Drozdzal G ，Rajakulasingam Y ，Maraj D ，Wadhawan S ，Umali N ，Wang R ，McCall M ，Aronson JK ，Plüddemann A ，Moja L ，Magrini N ，Heneghan C ... -  《-》

Selection of WHO-recommended essential medicines for non-communicable diseases on National Essential Medicines Lists.

Jarvis JD ，Woods H ，Bali A ，Oronsaye E ，Persaud N ... -  《-》

Insights from the WHO and National Lists of Essential Medicines: Focus on Pediatric Diabetes Care in Africa.

Access to essential medicines in pediatric endocrinology and diabetes is limited in resource-limited countries. The World Health Organization (WHO) maintains two non-binding lists of essential medicines (EMLs) which are often used as a template for developing national EMLs. We compared a previously published master list of medicines for pediatric endocrinology and diabetes with the WHO EMLs and national EMLs for countries within the WHO African region. To better understand actual access to medicines by patients, we focused on diabetes and surveyed pediatric endocrinologists from 5 countries and assessed availability and true cost for insulin and glucagon. Most medicines that are essential in pediatric endocrinology and diabetes were included in the national EMLs. However, essential medicines, such as fludrocortisone, were present in less than 30% of the national EMLs despite being recommended by the WHO. Pediatric endocrinologists from the 5 focus countries reported significant variation in terms of availability and public access to insulin, as well as differences between urban and rural areas. Except for Botswana, glucagon was rarely available. There was no significant relationship between Gross National Income and the number of medicines included in the national EMLs. Governments in resource-limited countries could take further steps to improve EMLs and access to medicines such as improved collaboration between health authorities, the pharmaceutical industry, patient groups, health professionals, and capacity-building programs such as Paediatric Endocrinology Training Centres for Africa.

Rowlands A ，Ameyaw E ，Rutagarama F ，Dipesalema J ，Majaliwa ES ，Mbogo J ，Ogle GD ，Chanoine JP ... -  《-》

Global status of essential medicine selection: a systematic comparison of national essential medicine lists with recommendations by WHO.

Examining the availability of essential medicines is a necessary step to monitor country-level progress towards universal health coverage. We compared the 2017 essential medicine lists (EML) of 137 countries to the WHO Model List to assess differences by drug class and country setting. We extracted all medicines prioritised at country level from most recently available national EMLs and compared each national EML with the 2017 WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (MLEM) as the reference standard. We assess EMLs by WHO region and for different types of medicine subgroups (eg, cancer, anti-infectives, cardiac, psychiatric and anaesthesia medicines) using within second-level anatomical therapeutic class (ATC) drug classes of the ATC Index. We included 406 medicines from WHO's 2017 MLEM to compare to 137 concurrent national EMLs. We found a median of 315 (range from 44 to 983) medicines listed on national EMLs. The global median F1 score was 0.59 (IQR 0.47-0.70, maximum possible score indicating alignment with MLEM is 1). The F1 score was the highest (ie, most similar to MLEM) in the South-East Asia region and the lowest in the European region (ie, most dissimilar to MLEM). The F1 score was highest for stomatological preparations (median: 1.00), gynaecological-anti-infectives and antiseptics (median: 1.00), and medicated dressings (median: 1.00), and lowest for 9 anatomical or pharmacological groups (median: 0.00, eg, treatments for bone diseases, digestive enzymes). Most countries are expected to improve their national health coverage by 2030 offering access to essential medicines, but our results revealed substantial gaps in selection of medicines at the national level compared with those recommended by WHO. It is crucial that governments consider investing in those effective medicines that are now neglected and continue monitoring progress towards essential medicine access as part of universal health coverage.

Piggott T ，Nowak A ，Brignardello-Petersen R ，Cooke GS ，Huttner B ，Schünemann HJ ，Persaud N ，Magrini N ，Moja L ... -  《BMJ Open》