Презентация на тему Pharmaceutical monitoring and evaluation

assessing and monitoring pharmaceutical situation
Undertaking survey, sampling and

concepts on indicators

allows for corrective action, focus on inputs and outputs
Common

methods
Supervisory visits
Routine reporting of selected data
Sentinel sites for more detailed reporting/ intensive monitoring
Special studies for specific additional information

Evaluation
Part of overall pharmaceutical assessment, progress on meeting objectives
Types of evaluations
Needs assessment (situation analysis,
Formative evaluation (midterm review)
Summative evaluation (final evaluation)
Field surveys using standard pharmaceutical indicators & ongoing monitoring system, document review

Strategies developed in parallel for comprehensive unified strategy

monitoring?
Countries - focus action, prioritize, measure achievement

National policy-makers
synchronise policies

data and information to donors and other governmental agencies

International agencies
to assess the structure and capability of countries, assess the progress, accomplishment and impact of aid

Professional groups, NGOs and academia
to focus advocacy activities and information campaigns

Health facilities to be aware of institutional problems & improve situations

based on data/information on: availability, affordability, pricing, drug use

and regulatory profile, TRIPS, drug management situation.

Support implementation of activities and advise in the execution of work plans

Indicator-based tools to evaluate structures, processes, outcomes of in countries

WHO Evidence-Based Planning and Interventions
Guiding Country Works in Medicines

situations


Level I
Core structure
& process indicators

Level II
Core outcome/impact indicators
& household survey

Level III
Indicator tools for specific components
of the pharmaceutical sector

Pricing ● Traditional medicine
HIV/AIDS ● Assessing regulatory capacity
TRIPS

Systematic
survey

Questionnaire
(Health Officials)

Level I
Questionnaire/rapid assessment/checklist
Arrays achievement & weaknessess, illustrate sectoral approaches

Level II
Comprehensive monitoring of pharmaceutical strategy outcome and impact
Measures attainment of objectives

Level III
More detailed indicators for monitoring and evaluating specific areas/components

questionnaire
Inexpensive process to get information across countries
Can be done

repeatedly/regular period
Automated questionnaire and data encoding processing
Contents
National Medicines Policy
Regulatory system (marketing authorization, licensing, regulatory inspection, etc)
Medicines supply system, medicines financing, production and trade
Rational use of drugs

Package for Monitoring and Assessing County Pharmaceutical Situations"

Sytematic survey

Indicators
on availability, stock out, record keeping and expiry of key drugs
conservation conditions and handling of medicines
affordability (child and adult moderate pneumonia and option for other disease condition
drug prescribing, dispensing, patient knowledge
practical/operational system of managing a systematic survey and resources
17 survey forms-public health facilities, public pharmacy/dispensary, private pharmacy, warehouses
manual calculation and automated system for descriptive analysis

2003
Generic Prescribing

I and Level II- facility surveys do not measure

access from the patient/consumer perspective.
Only household surveys can provide population-based information about how pharmaceutical policies affect the well-being of individuals.

access their medicines, where they get them
How much they

pay
Identify access and affordability in relation to socio economic indicators, barriers
Examine use of medicines (acute and chronic diseases)
Perceptions on access, use and quality; handling of medicines

of total/non-food/health expenditures
Average household medicine expenditures for a reported

illness (acute, chronic, by illness)
% of households with at least partial medicine insurance coverage
Mixed Indicators of Access (availability)
Percent of households reporting a serious acute illness who sought care outside but did not take any medicine.
Percent of households who do not have at home a medicine prescribed to a chronically ill person.

kept for future use
Percent of household medicines with adequate

label/ adequate primary packaging
Perception of quality
Percent of respondents who agree that quality of services at their public health care facility is good / quality of services by private provider is good
Percent of respondents who agree that brand name medicines are better than generics/ imported medicines are of better quality than locally manufactured medicines.

population based data to policy evaluation, development and planning

Segregation by socio economic profile
No basic guideline standard???on household survey
What is a household / who is a household member
Sampling
Recall periods- ( number of days, self report, caregivers)
Type of survey (general population, disease based survey)

and monitoring
WHO/INRUD RDU indicators
Rapid assessment
Global survey on Paediatrics medicines
Questionnaire

on public sector medicines procurement and supply management systems in countries
Assessment of regulatory capacity

minimize selection bias and is representative of the reference

population
A balance between what is desirable and what is feasible- smallest one with a degree of precision

random)
5 regions/districts
1 should be among the lowest income

generating areas
1 should be the largest or capital city
3 others should be randomly selected
30 facilities each
30 cases per facility
Systematic sampling
Non probability / purposive/ quota sampling

5 regions in the country

From each region select 6

public health facilities (30 reference public health facilities)


In each of reference facility, select 30 households (900 households)

supply or drug use data)
Geographic Characteristics
Administration and drug supply

system
Epidemiologic or socio-economic differences
Health Facility Characteristics
Differences in management
Peer norms and collective habits
Provider Characteristics
Training, knowledge, clinical experience
Economic incentives
Industry pressure

Result: Effective sample size is reduced

nurses, pharmacists or paramedical staff
Health ministry/department staff and temporary

employees (health related background and experience)
data collectors from different parts of the country (language differences)

with WHO, ministry/department of health, public health facilities, private

drug outlets, warehouses
Making logistic arrangements and budget allocations
Technical requirements:
Tailoring the tool-specific items of the survey forms, e.g. key basket of medicines, treatment guidelines, etc.
Training data collectors to carry out the survey and use the survey and summary forms
Analyzing and computing the data
Preparing a report and using result

numbers, percentage, or averages)
Binomials (yes” and “no)”
Linked

to an important input, process, or outcome
Well-established indicators can be adapted/ modified to reflect the realities
Field test

facilitates:
comparing the performance of facilities, districts, urban vs rural,

private & public sector, overall situations in countries
seeing trends over time
setting target

(logical value is

peers
Norms may be wrong

Measures of central tendency
Mean: average value, sensitive to outliers,

weighed toward skewed value, best summary of normally distributed values
Median: middle value, resistant to outliers, good summary of any distribution
Equivalent if data are normally distributed
Measure of variation
25th and 75th percentiles: boundaries of middle half of values, good summary of the overall spread of values, better summary of skewed data

value (100%-adequate labelling, meds dispensed, adherence to STG, availability

of medicines, generic, adequacy of storage; 0 days of stock out,)
Others need further studies
affordability ( economic profile)
Antibiotic use and injection, meds prescribes are more complex- are (<30, <20 and < 2 and can be controversial)
Optimal value largely depend on disease pattern, policies and treatment G/L and vary from country to country
These values can be calculated empirically

but feasible data collection process is necessary in policy

making and activity implementation. This should include population based information
Should demonstrate that in the long run regular monitoring and evaluation is not difficult and can be done in a cost efficient manner
Portion of country support budget and project grants should be allotted to monitoring and evaluation using indicators
Timely report and information/data sharing