WHO | Tanzania assessment prices

THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA

MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL WELFARE

Assessment of the prices and availability of medicines for children in Tanzania

NOVEMBER 2010

Published by the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, Dar es Salaam, The United Republic of Tanzania. © 2011 Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, The United Republic of Tanzania Any part of this document may be reproduced in any form without the prior permission of the publisher provided that this is not for profit and that due acknowledgement is given. Any reproduction for profit must be made with the prior permission of the publisher. Copies of this report may be obtained from: The Permanent Secretary Ministry of Health and Social Welfare P.O. Box 9083 Dar es Salaam Tel: 255 22 2120261 Fax: 255 22 2139951

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...................................................................................................................................... I

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................II

1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................1

1.1 Background....................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Country background ....................................................................................................................................... 2

1.3 The rational use of paediatric medicines ...................................................................................................... 3

1.4 Cost sharing in Tanzania ................................................................................................................................ 4

1.5 Medicine procurement .................................................................................................................................... 4

1.6 Medicine prices ................................................................................................................................................ 5

2. OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................................................6

2.1 Broad objective ................................................................................................................................................. 6

2.2 Specific objectives ............................................................................................................................................ 6

3. METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................................7

3.1 Description of the study areas........................................................................................................................ 7

3.2 Study population and sampling .................................................................................................................... 8

3.2.1 National level................................................................................................................................... 8

3.2.2 Selection of health facilities............................................................................................................ 8

3.3 Survey medicines ............................................................................................................................................. 8

3.4 Selection and training of survey personnel .................................................................................................. 9

3.5 Methods of data collection.............................................................................................................................. 9

3.5.1 Data collection at the national level...................................................................................................... 9

3.5.2 Data collection at health facilities ......................................................................................................... 9

3.6 Data entry and analysis................................................................................................................................. 10

3.7 Ethical considerations.................................................................................................................................... 10

3.8 Expected results ............................................................................................................................................. 10

4. RESULTS.................................................................................................................................................11

4.1 Availability of medicines in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors ............ 12

4.2 Cross‐sector comparison of medicine availability..................................................................................... 14

4.2 Facility prices in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors ................................ 16

4.5 Cross‐sector comparison of patient prices.................................................................................................. 19

4.6 Affordability ................................................................................................................................................... 22

5. DISCUSSION.........................................................................................................................................23

5.1 Public sector availability ............................................................................................................................... 23

5.2 Public sector prices ........................................................................................................................................ 25

5.3 Private sector availability and patient prices ............................................................................................. 26

5.4 Nongovernmental Organization sector patient prices and availability ................................................. 26

5.5 Intersectoral comparison of patient prices ................................................................................................. 27

5.6 Affordability to patients................................................................................................................................ 27

6. CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................................................28

7. RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................................................30

REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................................31

BIBILIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................................................32

ANNEXES..............................................................................................................................................................33

Annex 1: Timetable of survey.............................................................................................................................. 33

Annex 2: Medicines data collection form used for survey .............................................................................. 34

INSTRUCTIONS .................................................................................................................................................35

Annex 3: List of facilities and outlets sampled.................................................................................................. 42

Annex 4: List of the paediatric medicines surveyed......................................................................................... 44

Annex 5: Analysis summary sheets.................................................................................................................... 45

List of figures

Figure 1 A map of Tanzania showing the six regions surveyed in the study: A‐Dar es Salaam, B‐Mtwara, C‐Mbeya, D‐ Manyara, E‐Shinyanga and F‐Tabora ...................................................... 7

Figure 2: Percentage availability of 50 target medicines in the three sectors ........................................... 14

Figure 3 Median price ratios of lowest price generic medicines in the private sector ........................... 17

Figure 4: Comparison of median price ratios between public procurement prices and public sector facility (patient) prices ..................................................................................................................... 20

List of tables

Table 1: Trends in early childhood mortality rates............................................................................... 1

Table 2: Geographical distribution of the surveyed health facilities (n = 143)...................................... 8

Table 3: Analysis of medicine availability (%) by therapeutic class ................................................... 15

Table 4: Number of times more expensive, highest priced vs. lowest priced generics ...................... 18

Table 5: Price variation across nongovernmental organization medicine outlets .............................. 19

Table 6: Price difference between medicines found in both public and private sectors..................... 21

Table 7: Medicines with median price ratios > 2 in the private sector and their corresponding availability in the public sector ............................................................................................. 21

Table 8: Affordability of treating acute conditions: number of days’ wages the lowest‐paid government worker would need to spend to purchase lowest priced generic medicines in the three sectors surveyed................................................................................................. 22

Table 9: Affordability of treating chronic conditions: number of days’ wages the lowest‐paid government worker would need to spend to purchase the lowest priced generic medicines in the three sectors surveyed................................................................................................. 23

ABBREVIATIONS

ADDO Accredited drug dispensing outlets

AIDS Acquired Immuno‐Deficiency Syndrome

HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus

HPG Highest Price Generic

LPG Lowest Price Generic

MDG Millennium Development Goals

MPR Median Price Ratios

NEMLIT National Essential Medicines List for Tanzania

SD Standard deviation

TShs Tanzanian shillings

Assessment of the prices and availability of medicines for children in Tanzania -- Page i

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Ministry of Health and Social Welfare would like to express its gratitude to the World Health Organization whose financial support through the Better Medicines for Children project made it possible to conduct this survey. The Ministry would also like to acknowledge all people who contributed their time and expertise throughout the survey process to make it successful. In particular we would like to mention the following: Dr Margret E. Mhando, Director for Hospital Services; Mr Joseph Muhume, Assistant Director Pharmaceutical Services; Ms Rose Shija, National Professional Officer for Essential Drugs and Medicines Policy; and Ms Alexandra Cameron, Technical Officer, Department of Essential Medicines and Pharmaceutical Policy, World Health Organization Headquarters. The Ministry is grateful to all health workers in the surveyed facilities and pharmacies for facilitating the data collection process. Similarly, the trainers of the data collectors are also acknowledged, especially Ms Anita Silo. The close cooperation and guidance received from the Regional Medical Officers and Regional Pharmacists of the regions surveyed i.e. Dar es Salaam, Manyara, Mbeya, Mtwara, Shinyanga and Tabora is highly appreciated. The Tanzania Food and Drugs Authority and the Medical Stores Department are acknowledged for providing useful information pertaining to medicine regulation and pricing respectively. Special gratitude is extended to all other people in all sectors who in one way or another gave invaluable information requested during the survey. Last but not least, the valuable work done by the data collectors and area supervisors who devoted their time and commitment to collect data is hereby acknowledged. These include: Mr L. Francis, Mr E. Lugayaza, Mr E. Mabonesho, Mr Z. Maganga, Ms S. Mapunjo, Ms S. Mashana, Mr J. Mfutakamba, Mr N. Mhadu, Dr S. Mung’ong’o, Mr J. Nassoro, Mr B. Nyaulingo, and Ms R. Tumbo. Finally, the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare wishes to acknowledge the Survey Manager Prof Dr M. Justin‐Temu for her leadership role in this survey.

Assessment of the prices and availability of medicines for children in Tanzania -- Page ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report describes a field study carried out in Tanzania to measure the availability and prices of paediatric medicines using the second edition of the World Health Organization/Health Action International standardized methodology. Data on the prices and availability of 50 paediatric medicines were collected from a sample of health facilities in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors in Dar es Salaam, Manyara, Mbeya, Mtwara, Mwanza, Shinyanga, and Tabora regions. In total, the survey team collected data from 143 facilities. Data were also collected on government procurement prices from the Medical Stores Department. For each medicine, data were collected on the highest priced generics and lowest priced generics products found at each facility. Medicine prices are expressed as median price ratio (MPR), which are ratios relative to the Management Sciences for Health International Reference Prices for 2009. Using the salary of the lowest‐paid unskilled government worker, affordability was calculated as the number of daysʹ wages needed to purchase medicines for standard treatments of common conditions. The availability of paediatric medicines assessed in this survey was low in all sectors. In the public sector, the mean availability of all generic medicines in the basket was only 32.0%, while availability of medicines on the national essential medicines list was higher at 45.3%. This suggests patients seeking care in the public sector must go without medicines or purchase them elsewhere, such as in the private sector. Here, the mean availability of the basket of medicines studied was only slightly higher than in the public sector (34.4%). Among nongovernmental organizations, mean availability of the basket of medicines studied was similar to that observed in the public and private sectors (32.1%). In the private sector medicines were, on average, more available in urban areas than in rural areas, while in the public and nongovernmental organization sectors availability did not vary significantly between urban and rural areas. When availability was analysed by therapeutic areas, oral rehydration solution for the treatment of diarrhoea showed moderate availability, ranging from 57.4% in the public sector to 72.9% in the private sector. However, dispersible zinc tablets were consistently less available (29.8%, 43.8%, and 33.3% in the public and private and nongovernmental organization sectors, respectively). Antibiotics had variable availability depending on the medicine and sector surveyed. For example, benzylpenicillin injection had reasonable availability in all three sectors (87.2%, 66.7% and 87.5% in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors, respectively). Amoxicillin suspension had high availability in private and nongovernmental organization facilities, but was only available in 55% of the public facilities surveyed. Ceftriaxone injection had poor availability in all sectors (57.1%, 25.0% and 22.9% in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors, respectively), as did gentamicin injection (21.3%, 6.3% and 18.8% in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors, respectively). For antiasthmatics, beclometasone inhaler was not available in any public or nongovernmental facilities, and was only available in 6.3% of private facilities. While salbutamol inhaler had higher availability in all three sectors, it should be noted that it is listed on the national essential medicines list as a level D medicine (regional and referral hospitals) and as such availability in the public sector only reflects availability at this level of care.

Assessment of the prices and availability of medicines for children in Tanzania -- Page iii

Opioid analgesics, namely morphine suspension and tablets, were not available in any facilities in any sector. Anticonvulsants also showed consistently low availability in all sectors. With the exception of phenobarbital injection in the public sector, the availability of the anticonvulsants surveyed was consistently less than 20% in all sectors, and was often 0%. In the public sector procurement agency, the Medical Stores Department, only 27 of the 50 medicines surveyed were in stock at the time of the survey. On average, prices were 0.80 times international reference prices, indicating a good level of purchasing efficiency. However, three medicines had median price ratios substantially higher than international reference prices: epinephrine injection (MPR=1.73), phenobarbital injection (MPR=2.38), and gentamicin injection (MPR=3.14). In the public sector health facilities, generic medicines were found to have a median MPR of 0.96, ranging from 0.17 for artemether + lumefantrine dispersible tablet to 13.41 for albendazole chewable tablet. Public sector patient prices were, on average, 19.4% higher than the public sector procurement prices. In some cases patient prices were significantly higher than procurement prices. For example, albendazole chewable tablets cost 16 times the procurement price at health facilities. In the private sector, lowest price generics had a median MPR of 2.22, however within the basket median price ratios ranged from 1.49 for a salbutamol inhaler to 14.9 for albendazole chewable tablets. One quarter of the lowest priced generic medicines in the basket had median price ratios greater than 3.66, that is, prices nearly four times higher than the international reference prices. Minimal price variation was observed across private sector facilities. The lowest priced generic medicines in the private sector were priced 154.9 % higher than in the public sector. This means that a patient buying a generic medicine in the private sector would pay 154.9% times more than if the same medicine were purchased in the public sector, if it was available. In the private sector, both highest priced and lowest priced generics were found for 10 medicines, indicating that for these products private sector outlets are stocking at least two generic equivalents. Highest priced generics had a median MPR of 5.34, and were found to be on average 96% more expensive than their corresponding lowest priced generics. Among nongovernmental organizations, the lowest priced generic medicines in the basket were found to have a median MPR of 2.41, corresponding to prices 9.8% and 154.9% more than those in the private and public sectors, respectively. The affordability data indicated that the treatment of acute cases such as pneumonia, malaria, and diarrhoea with lowest priced generics cost between 0.1 and 0.3 days’ wages in the private sector and between 0.1 and 0.2 days’ wages in the nongovernmental organization sector, while in the public sector it was free. The treatment of malaria with artemether + lumefantrine was subsidized in both public and nongovernmental organization sectors. The treatment of asthma using the lowest priced generic salbutamol inhaler cost 0.9 and 0.7 days’ wages in the private and nongovernmental organization sectors, respectively, while in the public sector it was free. Although these treatments appear relatively affordable it should be noted that other treatment costs such as consultation fees and diagnostic tests have not been included; total treatment costs would therefore be considerably higher.

Assessment of the prices and availability of medicines for children in Tanzania -- Page iv

In conclusion, the availability of paediatric medicines assessed in this survey was low across all sectors. While the public sector dispenses most medicines for children free of charge, low availability may lead people to purchase medicines in the private sector or go without treatment. In the private and nongovernmental organization sectors some medicines cost several times their international reference price and may not be affordable for the poorest segments of the population. Therefore the availability, price and affordability of paediatric medicines in Tanzania should be improved in order to ensure equity in access to basic medical treatments, especially for the poor. Also sustained availability of medicines is crucial to assist the country in reaching the goals it has set within the National Road Map Strategic Plan to Accelerate the Reduction of Maternal, Newborn and Child Deaths in Tanzania, 2008‐2015; Health Sector Strategic Plan III, 2009‐2015; Mkakati wa Kukuza Uchumi na Kupunguza Umaskini Tanzania (National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty II, 2010‐2014); as well as the Millennium Development Goals. Progress will require a multi‐faceted approach, as well as the review and refocusing of policies, regulations and educational interventions.

Assessment of the prices and availability of medicines for children in Tanzania -- Page 1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

According to the World Health Organization, nearly nine million children die every year, many of them from treatable conditions such as diarrhoea, malaria, respiratory tract infections or pneumonia (1). Effective treatments exist for many of these conditions, yet are often unavailable for children. This occurs for a variety of reasons, including the lack of appropriate formulations, the lack of clinical trials in children, the need for off‐label use of medicines, inadequate procurement and supply systems, and the cost of medicines.

In 1989, heads of state ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which recognizes that every child has the right to survive. Renewed commitments to sustainable development, nutrition, and reduction of communicable diseases were made during the United Nations Special Session on Children in 2002. The increased attention to the United Nations commitment for child survival was again echoed by the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Specifically, MDG 4 calls for reduction of under‐five mortality by two‐thirds by the year 2015. Other related goals include MDG 1 (reduction of hunger), MDG 5 (improved maternal survival), MDG 6 (combating HIV/AIDS and malaria) and MDG 8.E (improved access to medicines).

In Tanzania, despite the gains and various efforts to improve maternal, newborn, and child health service delivery, the coverage of interventions is still low. There are obvious urban rural disparities, as well as significant differences among the districts. In addition to low coverage, there is inadequate resource allocation for maternal, newborn, and child health services, poor quality of service, limited access, insufficient community participation, and weak linkages between maternal, newborn, and child health and related programmes (2). However, trends show that childhood mortality has declined considerably over the past 10 to 15 years (3).

Table 1: Trends in early childhood mortality rates

Infant and under-five mortality rates, Tanzania, 1996-2010 Survey Year

Approximate calendar period

Infant mortality rate (per 1,000)

Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000)

1996 1992-1996 88 137 2004-2005 2000-2004 68 112 2007-2008 2003-2007 58 91 2010 2006-2010 51 81

Improved child survival rates, as shown in Table 1, are attributed to a combination of interventions, including gains in malaria control through improved diagnosis and treatment of malaria, as well as prevention through increased use of insecticide treated nets. In addition, the success of preventive measures such as measles vaccination, nutrition interventions, HIV/AIDS prevention and care, Expanded Programme on Immunization and implementation of the Integrated Management of Childhood Illness has greatly reduced morbidity and mortality and improved the wellbeing of children (4).


There is a notable lack of information at the local, national and international levels about the availability and cost of key medicines used in children. Also these medicines are often not included in national essential medicines lists and standard treatment guidelines. Studies have shown that children’s formulations are not available because of the competition to develop medicines for adults and the expectation that an adult formulation will be adapted for use in children.

In May 2007, the World Health Assembly passed a resolution to strengthen and support activities to make medicines more readily available to children and to promote the development of evidence‐based treatment guidelines to ensure that drugs are used appropriately in children. Following this, the World Health Organization initiated the Better Medicines for Children project in 2009, with funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The goal of the project is to improve access to essential medicines for children by addressing issues of availability, safety, efficacy and price. One of the four strategic objectives of the project is to promote access to essential medicines for children in priority countries by promoting their inclusion in national essential medicines lists, treatment guidelines and procurement schemes; working with drug regulatory authorities to expedite regulatory assessment of essential medicines for children; and developing measures to monitor and manage their prices.

Tanzania is one of the countries participating in the Better Medicines for Children project with the aim of addressing current gaps in the availability of children’s medicines in order to improve access. As part of the Better Medicines for Children project activities in Tanzania, a survey of the availability and price of key paediatric medicines was undertaken. The survey is part of a series of baseline assessments being undertaken to understand the current situation concerning access to essential medicines for children. Once the situation has been assessed, it will be possible to advocate for changes that will benefit children and their families and lead to measurable improvements in health outcomes.

1.2 Country background

The United Republic of Tanzania is a union between Tanganyika (Tanzania Mainland) and Zanzibar. It has a total area of 945 000 square kilometres of which 883 000 is land; 881 000 square kilometres on the mainland and 2000 square kilometres on Zanzibar. The population of Tanzania rose from 17.5 million in the 1978 census to 34.6 million (mainland: 33 584 078 and Zanzibar: 984 531) in the 2002 census. The 2002 census also showed that 80% of the population lived in rural areas, women of childbearing age and children under five years of age each represented 20% of the population, and there were approximately 1.3 million infants in the country. At an annual growth rate of 2.9%, it is projected that the total population in 2010 could now be 42.95 million.

With a gross domestic product per capita of US$354 (2007), Tanzania is considered a low‐income country. Annual gross domestic product growth in 2007 and 2008 were 7.1% and 7.5%, respectively, however it went down to 6.0% in 2009, partly due to the global financial crisis (4). The country’s economy is based mainly on agriculture and tourism, which accounts for 75‐78% of the total export earnings but meets only one‐


third of Tanzaniaʹs import requirements. According to 2006 estimates, Tanzania’s unemployment rate is approximately 11%,(5) and 34% of the country’s population is living below the poverty line (2007 estimate). Total health expenditure per capita was US$ 45 in 2006, significantly lower than the regional average of US$ 148 (6). Government spending on public health was only US$ 6 per capita in 2001 but has now reached around US$ 12, which is still below the Abuja target of US$ 15.

In spite of developments made after independence and the favourable economic growth realized recently, Tanzania’s social indicators, which include health, are still below those of other countries. In the health sector, some of the causes include: • shortfalls in the annual health sector budget allocations;

• increased demand for health care due to expanding growth of the population and changes in disease patterns;

• increased essential health care costs;

• increased morbidity and mortality due to HIV/AIDS.

In an effort to strengthen the pharmaceutical sector, the government endorsed the first National Drug Policy,(7) Standard Treatment Guidelines, and National Essential Drug List for Tanzania in 1991. The National Drug Policy established a master plan to improve the pharmaceutical sector between 1992 and 2000, with clear objectives, strategies, time frames and budgets required to achieve development in key areas. The Standard Treatment Guidelines and National Essential Drug List for Tanzania were later revised in 1997, and the current version was reviewed in 2007 (8). The aims of the guidelines were to provide health workers with a limited number of medicines and a set of treatment protocols covering diseases and conditions found in the country so that prescribing and dispensing practices can be rationalized. The Standard Treatment Guidelines and National Essential Drug List for Tanzania also help in medicine quantification, procurement and supply to achieve better outcomes for patients, an important objective of all health care systems. The Ministry of Health and Social Welfare’s policy requires all health workers in government, private and nongovernmental organization facilities to strictly adhere to the Standard Treatment Guidelines and mandates that all procurement, labelling, prescribing and dispensing should be by generic name as much as possible.

1.3 The rational use of paediatric medicines

Surveys undertaken by the World Health Organization have found that one third of patients around the world die of irrational drug use rather than of the disease itself (9). The irrational use of medicines is a significant issue in Tanzanian health facilities. Although previous studies on rational prescribing of medicines have found that the average number of medicines per prescription ranged from 1.8 to 2.9 in public facilities and from 1.8 to 2.8 in the church‐owned primary health facilities,(10,11,12,13,14) there was a high rate of irrational antibiotic and injection use, particularly in the private sector (12). Similar findings have been observed in church‐owned primary health facilities (14). However, in almost all the studies generic


prescribing was very high (≥ 80%) with the exception of one study that reported rates of generic prescribing between 48‐52%.

Many studies have been done to document drug use patterns. These studies indicate that over prescribing, multi‐drug prescribing, misuse of drugs, use of unnecessary expensive drugs and overuse of antibiotics and injections are the most common problems of irrational drug use by prescribers, as well as consumers. Improving drug use would have important financial and public health benefits (15).

1.4 Cost sharing in Tanzania

In 1993, the Government of Tanzania developed a programme for the implementation of cost sharing in health services. The main objective was to generate additional resources to compliment government budgetary allocations. By January 1994, user fees (cost sharing and drug capitalization) had been introduced for health services. In addition, community health funds were introduced at the district level and in 2001, a national health insurance fund was established mainly for civil servants. The insurance fund refunds institutions (not individuals) through a fee‐for‐service mechanism, which began operating in October 2001. Beneficiaries of the systems are public health facilities, faith‐based health facilities and a few private pharmacies. Through the insurance fund, accredited health facilities provide services and send bills to the fund for settlement. However, not all health facilities are registered with the insurance fund. The medicine prices to be refunded are set by the insurance fund.

To uphold its policy of equity, universal access and affordability, the government provides exemptions and waivers within the cost‐sharing programme. According to the programme, exemptions are defined as statutory entitlements to free public health services, and waivers are conditional temporary entitlements for those classified as ‘unable to pay’ (as determined by the management of the health facilities as stipulated in the implementation guidelines).

Categories specified for exemption are:

• maternity and child health services in all grade III services;

• children under five, and the elderly (>60 years of age);

• patients with the following medical problems: tuberculosis, leprosy, hypertension, diabetes, mental illness, cancer and HIV/AIDS, and epidemic diseases such as cholera, meningitis, plague, etc.

1.5 Medicine procurement

The pharmaceutical procurement, supply and distribution systems are handled by the Medical Stores Department in the public sector, and by private pharmaceutical wholesalers in the private sector. The Medical Stores Department receives orders from all public health facilities and nongovernmental organization facilities and procures only those medicines registered by the Tanzania Food and Drugs Authority. Procurement is conducted through a competitive tender system.


Problems within the public supply system include poor transportation and infrastructure, which affects the distribution process. Currently there is only a pull system based on requisition, as the push system based on a medicine kit was phased out in 2007. In the pull system, drugs are ordered through requisitions to the Medical Stores Department according to both the needs of the facility and the availability of funds provided by the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare. This system serves all levels of health facilities.

1.6 Medicine prices

The rise of new diseases such as HIV/AIDS, and increasing resistance to medicines of potentially fatal diseases such as malaria and tuberculosis, all contribute to high expenditures on medicines. In high‐income countries, governments spend about 10% of their health budgets on medicines, while in low‐income countries, medicines account for 25% of government health budgets (16). Tanzania spends approximately 15% of the total health budget on medicines.

Pricing of medicines is affected by many factors at the international level. Pharmaceutical companies infrequently implement equitable pricing – selling the same medicines at different prices in different countries in accordance with people’s purchasing power. Surveys in developing countries have shown that some commonly used medicines are more expensive than in industrialized countries. Changes in trade regulations and particularly rules relating to intellectual property, such as patent rights, may also affect international prices and availability of medicines (17).

The high price of medicines is one of the most important obstacles to access to health services. National policies on medicine pricing and procurement strategies are required to ensure that medicines are affordable to the majority of the population. Policies are also needed to improve health infrastructures, ensure equitable and sustainable financing and promote the rational use of medicines.

The difficulty in finding reliable information on the availability and price of paediatric medicines hinders governments from constructing sound medicine pricing policies or evaluating their impact. It also makes it difficult for governments to evaluate whether their expenditure on medicines takes into account medicines for children and whether it is comparable to that of other countries at a similar stage of development. Furthermore, those responsible for purchasing medicines cannot negotiate cheaper prices because they have no sound price data from which to start their negotiations. The World Health Organization and Health Action International have developed medicine price indicators, which report the sales prices of originator brands and generically equivalent medicines in comparison with international reference prices.

The low availability of medicines for children in health facilities, including public, private (retail pharmacies) and mission (nongovernmental organization) facilities, is also of concern. Information on the level of availability and prices of childrenʹs medicine formulations are currently lacking in Tanzania. Although some medicines for children are included on the National Essential Medicines List for Tanzania and in


Standard Treatment Guidelines, the availability of these medicines in the health facilities is unknown. The findings from the study will assist the government in monitoring the impact of policies relating to medicine pricing, the effect of the introduction of the National Essential Drug List for children, the availability of essential medicines for children in health facilities, and the influence of Medical Stores Department policies related to procurement and supply. It will also assist the government in procuring medicines for children and in negotiating equitable medicine prices based on ability to pay. The results will also help government and nongovernmental organizations to understand the affordability of essential medicines for children in different segments of the health care sector.

Thus, there is a need to determine the level of availability of children’s medicines in health facilities and the prices that parents and caretakers are paying to purchase treatments. Knowledge and awareness of availability and prices are important so that appropriate measures and action can be taken to improve access. The aim of this study is therefore to assess the availability and price of medicines for children in health facilities in Tanzania.

2. OBJECTIVES

2.1 Broad objective

To survey the availability and prices of fifty children’s medicines used to treat the spectrum of illnesses that contribute to the disease burden in children in Tanzania.

2.2 Specific objectives

The specific objectives of the study were to answer the following questions: • What is the availability of paediatric medicines in the public, private and

nongovermental organization sectors?

• Is the public sector purchasing paediatric medicines efficiently in comparison with international reference prices?

• What is the price of highest and lowest priced generic paediatric medicines in the public, private and nongovermental organization sectors, and how does this compare with international reference prices?

• How affordable are medicines for the treatment of childrenʹs common conditions for people with low income?

• Are there therapeutic committees in the health facilities?


3. METHODOLOGY

The methodology described in the World Health Organization manual titled Measuring medicine prices, availability, affordability and price components, 2nd edition, (16) was used as a guide to collect data and analyse medicines prices in a standardized way. It involves a systematic facility‐based survey to collect accurate data and reliable information on a selected number of medicines. It is characterized by: a standard list of medicines for comparison; a systematic sampling process; use of international reference prices; comparison of highest and lowest priced generic equivalent medicines; sector comparisons (e.g. public, private and mission); and affordability estimations. A timetable for the survey was prepared (see Annex 1).

3.1 Description of the study areas

The survey assessed the prices and availability of medicines in six geographical areas in Tanzania: the capital city Dar es Salaam and the five other administrative regions of Manyara, Mbeya and Mtwara, Shinyanga and Tabora, representing the northern, western, central and southern areas of the country, respectively (Figure 1). These regions are quite different economically.

Figure 1 A map of Tanzania showing the six regions surveyed in the study: A-Dar es Salaam, B-Mtwara, C-Mbeya, D- Manyara, E-Shinyanga and F-Tabora

The selection of study areas also took into account the Medical Stores Department zones in these regions, which provide a good representation of the country. The lists of health facilities were provided by the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare. The Tanzania Food and Drugs Authority provided lists of retail pharmacies and regional pharmacists provided the list of medicine stores and accredited drug dispensing outlets.


In each area, the health facilities closest to the consultant/regional/district hospital were chosen for the survey. Since the sampling was representative, the results can be generalized to the country.

3.2 Study population and sampling

The study population included the Medical Stores Department, as well as public, private and nongovernmental organization health facilities. Health facilities in the study were sampled out as described below.

3.2.1 National level

At the national level the study population included the Medical Stores Department, the only government purchasing agent.

3.2.2 Selection of health facilities

The study population included eight public facilities, eight private facilities and eight nongovernmental organizations in each of the six selected regions, resulting in a total of one hundred and forty three health facilities from both urban and rural areas, as shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Geographical distribution of the surveyed health facilities (n = 143)

In each region, the public sector sample was composed of one referral hospital, one regional hospital, two district hospitals in urban areas and four primary health facilities (health centre or dispensary) in rural areas surrounding the district hospitals. The private sector sample was composed of four retail pharmacies in urban areas and four medicine stores in rural areas. For the nongovernmental organization four health facilities in urban areas and four in rural areas were selected in the six regions. A list of the facilities included in the sample is provided in Annex 3.

3.3 Survey medicines

In medicine price and availability surveys being carried out as part of the Better Medicines for Children project, the list of paediatric medicines to be studied has two components: a list of 22 recommended medicines to be surveyed in all participating countries and states, and a supplementary list of up to 30 medicines chosen from among the commonly‐used paediatric medicines at national and state level. A list of the 50 medicines included in the survey can be found in Annex 4. Of the 50 medicines included in the survey, 32 can be found in the national essential medicines list. Of these, 19 are expected to be available at dispensaries and higher levels of care, 1 is

Regions: Public Sector

Private Retail Pharmacies

Faith-based NGOs

Dar es Salaam 4 urban 4 rural 4 urban 4 rural 4 urban 4 rural Manyara 3 urban 4 rural 4 urban 4 rural 4 urban 4 rural Mbeya 4 urban 4 rural 4 urban 4 rural 4 urban 4 rural Mtwara 4 urban 4 rural 4 urban 4 rural 4 urban 4 rural Shinyanga 4 urban 4 rural 4 urban 4 rural 4 urban 4 rural Tabora 4 urban 4 rural 4 urban 4 rural 4 urban 4 rural TOTAL 47 48 48


expected at health centres and higher levels, 11 are expected at district hospitals and above, and 1 is expected at regional and referral hospitals only. For the sake of this study, children range from 0 to 18 years of age.

3.4 Selection and training of survey personnel

The area supervisors, data collectors and data analyst were selected from teaching institutions, the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare and from among regional pharmacists in the surveyed regions. Survey personnel selected were familiar with the medicines, the geographical areas for data collection, and data analysis. The training of area supervisors, data collectors and data analyst took place at the Belinda Hotel, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania for three days from 10‐12 November 2010. Each of the six regions in the study had a survey team consisting of a data collector and an area supervisor.

The training workshop covered the following topics: a) Purpose of the Better Medicines for Children project and the medicine

availability and price survey

b) Instructions on how to conduct the survey

c) How to collect data

d) Introduction to the list of medicines in the survey

e) Completing the field survey forms during data collection

f) Data entry and verification On the second day of the training workshop, a pilot test of data collection, entry and analysis was conducted. At the end of the training, the data collectors and their supervisors departed to their different stations to complete the survey.

3.5 Methods of data collection

Face to face interviews using structured survey forms provided in Annex 2 were adopted in the collection of data.

3.5.1 Data collection at the national level

The survey manager collected prices from the Medical Stores Department, the only government procurement agent.

3.5.2 Data collection at health facilities

Data was collected between 14 and 24 November 2010. A total of 47 public, 48 private and 48 nongovernmental organization health facilities were surveyed. At each health facility level, and for each medicine, two products were monitored, namely the highest priced generic and lowest priced generic medicine available at the facility. For the purposes of the survey, a generic medicine is defined as a


pharmaceutical product usually intended to be interchangeable with the originator brand product, manufactured without a licence from the originator manufacturer and marketed after the expiry of patent or other exclusivity rights. When a target product was available, the price of the pack was recorded on the data collection form. In cases where medicines were provided free‐of‐charge, only availability was recorded. The supervisor and the data collector in each region travelled together and at the end of the day, the supervisor reviewed the data collection forms and signed them. Wherever there was any doubt, a price seemed too high or some data were missing, the facility was revisited the next day before visiting other facilities. Initially the data collectors were instructed to collect the data for 8 facilities for each sector in the region. However, some of these facilities had less than 50% of the medicines, therefore, back‐up facilities were visited and this resulted in an increase of the number of facilities in the sample.

3.6 Data entry and analysis

The data analyst used a computerized Excel workbook, provided as part of the World Health Organization/Health Action International survey tools, to enter and analyze the data. The exchange rate (US$ 1 to TShs 1485.0000) was entered in the international medicine reference price data page. Medicine unit price data were entered in the field consolidation pages for procurement, public sector, private sector and other sector (nongovernmental organizations). The workbook automatically summarized and compared the data by sector and by medicine. To estimate treatment affordability, the monthly wage of the lowest paid unskilled government worker (TShs 135 000 or US$ 90.91) and the median medicine prices found at the sample facilities were used to calculate the number of days’ wages needed to purchase standard courses of treatment.

To ensure the accuracy of the data, the area supervisors counterchecked all data entered to make sure that there were no errors in data entry. During this exercise data entry errors were corrected. In addition, the procedure of double entry was followed so as to eliminate data entry errors, which were left undetected when using the normal counterchecking method.

3.7 Ethical considerations

Since the survey was designed to be completed in collaboration with the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, there was no need to apply to the ethical committee for clearance to conduct the survey. However, permission was sought beforehand from the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare regional and district authorities to receive permission to work in their areas. All data collectors were given an introductory letter to present to the heads of facilities.

3.8 Expected results

Data collected during this survey will give the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare an indicative picture of the current availability and prices of children’s medicines in public, private and nongovernmental organization (mission) health facilities. This will enable the government to effectively make decisions that will benefit children


especially in the anticipation of scaling up antiretroviral treatment in accordance with the Tanzanian health plans. The Ministry of Health and Social Welfare will also be able to determine whether children’s medicines are available and affordable to this community.

Expected long‐term outcomes of the use of standard data collection tools and the survey results include:

• forming a basis for ongoing collaboration between the African countries

participating in the Better Medicines for Children project and the World Health Organization to improve the availability of medicines to children;

• providing a mechanism for monitoring changes in the availability and price of childrenʹs medicines over time and helping identify country‐specific supply and price problems that might be addressed by specific interventions. Cross‐country comparisons may also allow the identification of issues relevant for action across the region.

4. RESULTS

The results of this study will be presented according to the following sub‐topics:

• Availability of medicines in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors

• Intersectoral comparison of medicine availability

• Public procurement sector prices

• Facility prices in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors

• Intersectoral comparison of medicine prices

• Affordability to patients

Annex 5 contains the percent availability and median price ratios for individual medicines for the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors. The availability of individual medicines is calculated as the percentage (%) of medicine outlets where the medicine was found. Mean (average) availability is also reported for the overall ʹbasketʹ of medicines surveyed. The prices in this study are expressed as ratios relative to a standard set of international reference prices:

Median price ratio (MPR) = median local unit price international reference unit price

The international reference price serves as an external standard for evaluating local prices. The prices are expressed in this way so as to facilitate national and international price comparisons. The median price ratio is an expression of how much greater or less the local medicine price is than the international reference price. For example, a median price ratio of 2 would mean that the local medicine price is twice that of the international reference price.


The median price ratio results in this survey are based on reference prices taken from the 2009 Management Sciences for Health International Drug Price Indicator Guide (18). These reference prices are the medians of recent procurement prices offered by for‐profit and not‐for‐profit suppliers to international not‐for‐profit agencies for generic products. As averages can be skewed by outlying values, median values are generally used in the presentation of price results and discussion as they are a better representation of the mid‐point. The median is the value that divides the distribution in half. Results are also reported by quartile. A quartile is a percentile rank that divides distribution into four equal parts. The range of values containing the central half of the observations: that is, the range between the 25th and 75th percentiles (the range including the values that are up to 25% higher or down to 25% lower than the median) is called the inter‐quartile range.

4.1 Availability of medicines in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors

The availability of paediatric medicines assessed in this survey was low in all sectors.

Public sector

• The mean availability of the lowest priced generic medicines in the basket was found to be 32.0% with wide variation observed across individual medicines (SD 32.0%). Mean availability of medicines on the National Essential Drug list for Tanzania was higher at 45.3%.

• The following generic medicines had particularly high availability (80% and above): salbutamol inhaler (100% at level D facilities), artemether + lumefantrine (80.9%), benzylpenicillin injection (87.2%), lamivudine tablets (85.7%), Prednisolone tablets (85.7%) and quinine injection (85.1%).

• The following generic medicines had particularly low availability (20% and below): albendazole suspension (4.3%), amoxicillin + clavulanic acid suspension/dispersible tablet (0% and 2.1%), beclometasone inhaler (0%), carbamazepine suspension/chewable tablet (both 0%), co‐trimoxazole tablet (0%), diazepam injection and rectal solution (10.6% and 2.1%), digoxin tablet (0%), ferrous sulphate suspension (0%), gentamicin eye/ear drops (10.6%), isoniazid scored tablet (2.1%), morphine tablets and suspension (0% and 0%), nalidixic acid (0%), Phenobarbital injection (12.8%), phenytoin suspension and chewable tablet (both 0%), pyrazinamide tablet (6.4%), rifampicin suspension (0.0%), salbutamol tablet (2.1%), and vitamin A capsules (4.3%).

• The availability of children medicines was not significantly different between rural and urban areas.


Private sector

• The mean availability of generic medicines in the basket was found to be 34.4% with wide variation observed across individual medicines (SD 34.6%).

• The following generic medicines had particularly high availability (80% and above): albendazole chewable tablet (100%), amoxicillin oral suspension (93.8%), Co‐trimoxazole suspension (93.8%), gentamicin eye/ear drops (81.3%), nystatin drops (85.4%), and paracetamol suspension (97.9%).

• The following generic medicines had particularly low availability (20% and below): amoxicillin + clavulanic acid dispersible tablet (10.4%), beclometasone inhaler (6.3%), carbamazepine suspension and chewable tablet (6.3% and 0%), co‐trimoxazole tablet (0%), diazepam rectal solution and injection (each 0%), digoxin tablet (0%), Ferrous sulphate suspension (2.1%), gentamicin injection (6.3%), morphine tablet and suspension (each 0%), nalidixic acid (0%), phenobarbital injection (2.1%), phenytoin suspension and chewable tablet (each 0%), and salbutamol tablet (0%).

• Highest price generics were found for 10 medicines, indicating that for these products private sector outlets are stocking at least two generic equivalents. However availability of these medicines was less than 20% in all cases except paracetamol suspension (31.3%) and albendazole suspension (27.1%).

• Medicines were more available in urban facilities than in rural facilities and the overall means of number of drugs available, between rural and urban health facilities is statistically significant.

Nongovernmental Organization sector

• The mean availability of generic medicines in the basket was found to be 32.1%

(SD 32.1%) with wide variation observed across individual medicines.

• The following generic medicines had particularly high availability (80% and above): amoxicillin oral suspension (87.5%), benzylpenicillin suspension (87.5%), co‐trimoxazole suspension (87.5%), hydrocortisone injection (81.3%), paracetamol suspension (83.3%), and quinine injection (89.6%).

• The following generic medicines had particularly low availability (20% and below): amoxicillin + clavulanic acid suspension (8.3%), amoxicillin + clavulanic acid dispersible tablet (2.1%), beclometasone inhaler (0%), carbamazepine suspension and chewable tablet (2.1% and 0%), co‐trimoxazole tablet (0%), diazepam rectal solution and injection (0% and 4.2%), digoxin tablet (0%), ferrous sulphate suspension (0%), gentamicin injection (18.8%), isoniazid scored tablet (0%), lamivudine suspension (16.7%), morphine tablet and suspension (each (0%), nalidixic acid (0%), phenobarbital injection (16.7%), phenytoin suspension and chewable tablet (each 0%), pyrazinamide tablet (0%), rifampicin suspension (0%), salbutamol tablet (0%), and vitamin A capsule (4.2%).

• The availability of children medicines in nongovernmental organization facilities was not statistically significantly different between rural and urban areas.


4.2 Cross-sector comparison of medicine availability

Figure 2 shows the distribution of individual medicine availability in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors. Of the 50 medicines surveyed, 13, 12 and 15 were not available in any of the health facilities in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors, respectively, while 13, 11 and 11 medicines were available in 1‐24% of facilities. Only 7, 9 and 7 medicines were available in 75% or more of the public, private and nongovernmental organization health facilities, respectively.

Figure 2: Percentage availability of 50 target medicines in the three sectors

13 13

7

10

7

12

11

6 6

9

15

11

5

12

7

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0 1 to 24 25 to 49 50 to 74 75 to 100

% Availability

Num

ber o

f med

icin

es

publicprivateNGO

Table 3 shows the availability of individual medicines by therapeutic class across the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors. Oral rehydration solution for the treatment of diarrhoea showed moderate availability, ranging from 57.4% in the public sector to 72.9% in the private sector. However, dispersible zinc tablets were consistently less available (29.8%, 43.8%, and 33.3% in the public and private and nongovernmental organization sectors, respectively). Antibiotics had variable availability depending on the medicine and sector surveyed. For example, benzylpenicillin injection had reasonable availability in all three sectors (87.2%, 66.7% and 87.5% in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors, respectively). Amoxicillin suspension had high availability in private and nongovernmental organization facilities, but was only available in 55% of the public facilities surveyed. Ceftriaxone injection had poor availability in all sectors (57.1%, 25.0% and 22.9% in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors, respectively), as did gentamicin injection (21.3%, 6.3% and 18.8% in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors, respectively). For antiasthmatics, beclometasone inhaler was not available in any public or nongovernmental facilities, and was only available in 6.3% of private facilities. While salbutamol inhaler had higher availability in all three sectors, it should be noted that it is listed on the national essential medicines list as a level D medicine (regional and referral


hospitals) and as such availability in the public sector only reflects availability at this level of care.

Opioid analgesics, namely morphine suspension and tablets, were not available in any facilities in any sector. Anticonvulsants also showed consistently low availability in all sectors. With the exception of phenobarbital injection in the public sector, the availability of the anticonvulsants surveyed was consistently less than 20% in all sectors, and was often 0%.

Table 3: Analysis of medicine availability (%) by therapeutic class

Therapeutic class Medicine Name StrengthPublic sector

Private sector

NGO sector

Anemia Ferrous sulphate suspension 30mg/5ml 0.0% 2.1% 0.0%Anthelmintic Albendazole chewable tablet 200mg 63.8% 100.0% 66.7%Anthelmintic Albendazole suspension 100mg/5ml 4.3% 79.2% 31.3%Antiasthmatic Beclometasone inhaler 100mcg/dose 0.0% 6.3% 0.0%Antiasthmatic Epinephrine injection 1mg/ml 59.6% 20.8% 60.4%Antiasthmatic Hydrocortisone injecton 100mg 44.7% 56.3% 81.3%Antiasthmatic Prednisolone tab 5mg 85.7% 77.1% 64.6%Antiasthmatic Salbutamol inhaler 100 mcg/dose 100%* 62.5% 25.0%Antiasthmatic Salbutamol tab 2mg 2.1% 0.0% 0.0%Antibiotic Amoxicillin suspension 125mg/5ml 55.3% 93.8% 87.5%Antibiotic Amoxicillin+clavulanic acid susp125mg+31mg/5ml 0.0% 22.9% 8.3%Antibiotic Amoxicillin+clavulanic acid tab 250mg+125mg 2.1% 10.4% 2.1%Antibiotic Benzylpenicillin injection 5MU (3g) 87.2% 66.7% 87.5%Antibiotic Ceftriaxone injection 250mg/vial 57.1% 25.0% 22.9%Antibiotic Chloramphenicol injection 1gm/vial 46.8% 33.3% 52.1%Antibiotic Co - trimoxazole tab 20mg+100mg 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Antibiotic Co-trimoxazole suspension 8+40 mg/ml 61.7% 93.8% 87.5%Antibiotic Erythromycin oral suspension 125mg/5ml 38.3% 75.0% 70.8%Antibiotic Gentamicin eye/ear drops 0.3% 10.6% 81.3% 56.3%Antibiotic Gentamicin injection 10mg/ml 21.3% 6.3% 18.8%Antibiotic Nalidixic acid tab 250mg 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Anticonvulsant/antiepileptic Carbamazepine suspension 100mg/5ml 0.0% 6.3% 2.1%Anticonvulsant/antiepileptic Carbamazepine tab chewable 100mg 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Anticonvulsant/antiepileptic Diazepam injection 2mg/2ml 10.6% 0.0% 4.2%Anticonvulsant/antiepileptic Diazepam rectal solution 2.5mg/ml 2.1% 0.0% 0.0%Anticonvulsant/antiepileptic Phenobarbital injection 200mg/ml 28.6% 2.1% 16.7%Anticonvulsant/antiepileptic Phenytoin suspension 25or30mg/ml 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Anticonvulsant/antiepileptic Phenytoin tab chewable 50mg 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Antidiarrheal Oral rehydration solution to make 1L 57.4% 72.9% 68.8%Antidiarrheal Zinc dispersible tablet 20mg 29.8% 43.8% 33.3%Antifungal Nystatin drops 100,000IU/ml 21.3% 85.4% 60.4%Antimalarial Artemether+lumefantrine dispe 20mg+120mg 80.9% 18.8% 52.1%Antimalarial Quinine injection 600mg/2ml 85.1% 66.7% 89.6%Antituberculosis Isoniazid scored tab 50mg 2.1% ** 0.0%Antituberculosis Pyrazinamide tab 400mg 6.4% ** 0.0%Antituberculosis Rifampicin suspension 100mg/5ml 0.0% ** 0.0%ARV Lamivudine (3TC) tab 150mg 85.7% ** 33.3%ARV Lamivudine suspension 50mg/5ml 42.9% ** 16.7%ARV Nevirapine syrup 50mg/5ml 71.4% ** 25.0%Cardiovascular Digoxin tab 62.5 µg 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Cardiovascular Furosemide injection 20mg/2ml 71.4% 27.1% 52.1%NSAIMs Paracetamol suspension 24 or 25 mg/ml 51.1% 97.9% 83.3%Opioid Analgesic Morphine oral suspension 10mg/5ml 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Opioid Analgesic Morphine tab immed release 10mg 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Other Canula 24g 23.4% 22.9% 52.1%Other MRDT (Rapid Diagnostic Test for Falciparum malar 23.4% 0.0% 16.7%Other Normal saline 0.9% 57.4% 56.3% 75.0%Other Ringers soln - sodium lactate comp. 75.0% 43.8% 72.9%Vitamins Vitamin A cap 50,000 IU (15mg) 4.3% 35.4% 4.2%Vitamins Vitamin K1 injection 10mg/ml 28.6% 20.8% 22.9%* Availability at Level D health facilities. ** Excluded as not provided through the private sector.


Public procurement sector prices • Of the 50 medicines surveyed, only 27 were in stock at the time of assessment.

Public procurement prices for lowest priced generics were found on average to be 0.80 times the international reference price, which means that Tanzania is procuring medicines at prices below those available on the international market. However, within the basket of medicines surveyed, there were three medicines where the price was substantially greater than the international reference price. These medicines were phenobarbital injection (MPR = 2.38), gentamicin injection (MPR = 3.14) and epinephrine injection (MPR = 1.73).

• Highest price generics were not found. That is, only one generic product was found for each medicine, and this was taken as the lowest‐priced generic.

4.3 Facility prices in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors

Public sector As mentioned earlier, Tanzania practices a cost sharing system for charging patients. However, its implementation varies; some patients pay a flat rate for total treatment and other services, while others do not pay anything. Out of 47 public facilities surveyed 18 facilities were either charging flat rate or giving free medicines. The majority of facilities giving free medicines were primary health care facilities including health centres and dispensaries receiving drugs from the Medical Stores Department. Medicines for conditions like mental illness, epilepsy, tuberculosis, leprosy, HIV/AIDS and other chronic conditions were given free. Children under five years of age also receive free treatment including medicines and consultations. Therapeutic committees were found in only 10 health facilities. The data collector was shown the current minutes of the committee to confirm that they are functioning. • Of the 50 study medicines, only 12 had sufficient availability to enable

calculation of median price ratios.

• The lowest priced generic medicines were found to have a median MPR for the basket of 0.96.

• The price ratios for lowest priced generic medicines within the basket ranged from 0.17 for artemether + lumefantrine dispersible tablet to 13.41 for albendazole chewable tablet.

• No highest price generics were found in the public sector. That is, only one generic product was found for each medicine at each facility, and this was taken as the lowest‐priced generic.

• More than half (7 of 12) of the lowest priced generic medicines had large price variations across individual facilities. Medicines for which the 25th and 75th percentiles of the price ratio varied by 100% or more were albendazole chewable tablet, oral rehydration salts, hydrocortisone injection, furosemide injection, ceftriazone injection, chloramphenicol injection, and benzyl penicillin injection.


Private sector • Lowest price generics were found to have a median MPR of 2.22 (n=22) for the

medicines in the basket.

• However, within the lowest price generics basket the median price ratios ranged from 1.49 for salbutamol inhaler to 14.9 for albendazole chewable tablets. One quarter of the lowest price generic medicines in the basket had median price ratios greater than 3.66, that is, prices that were nearly four times higher than international reference prices. These products were albendazole chewable tablets (MPR=14.9), albendazole suspension (MPR=3.74), epinephrine injection (MPR=4.33), vitamin K injection (MPR=5.33), and vitamin A capsules (MPR=8.47).

• Figure 3 below shows the numbers of medicines with median price ratios for the lowest priced generics in the private sector varying from less than 1 to over 10 times international reference prices. One of the medicines (albendazole chewable tablet) was found to have a price greater than 10 times the international reference price. Three of the medicines were found to have prices between 5 and 10 times the international reference price while 18 of the medicines had prices between 1 and 5 times the international reference price and none of the medicines were below the international reference price.

Figure 3 Median price ratios of lowest price generic medicines in the private sector

0

18

3

1

0

5

10

15

20

< 1 1 to < 5 5 to < 10 > 10

Median price ratio

Num

ber

of m

edci

nes

• Of the 10 highest priced generic medicines found, 4 had sufficient availability to enable calculation of median price ratios: albendazole chewable tablet (MPR=89.39), albendazole suspension (MPR=6.36), paracetamol suspension (MPR=4.32) and salbutamol inhaler (MPR=1.85). The 4 highest priced generic medicines prices were found to be on average 96% more expensive than the corresponding lowest priced generics (Table 4).


Table 4: Number of times more expensive, highest priced vs. lowest priced generics

Median Price Ratio Medicine Highest priced

generic Lowest priced

generic

MPRHPG/MPRL

PG

Albendazole chewable tablet 200 mg

89.39 14.90 6.0

Albendazole suspension 100 mg/5ml

6.36 3.74 1.7

Paracetamol suspension 24 or 25 mg/ml

4.32 1.73 2.5

Salbutamol inhaler 100 mcg/dose

1.85 1.49 1.3

• Overall, lowest priced generic medicines prices showed little variability across

private sector medicine outlets. Medicines for which the 25th and 75th percentiles of the price ratio varied by 100% or more were epinephrine injection, vitamin K injection and prednisolone tablet. Medicines with no price variation between the 25th and 75th percentiles of the price ratio were albendazole chewable tablet, furosemide injection, hydrocortisone injection and zinc dispersible tablet.

Nongovernmental Organization sector As in public sector health facilities, some nongovernmental organization health facilities were practicing a cost sharing system. Some nongovernmental organization health facilities in the regions were also found to charge flat rates for services. Patients were paying flat rates or receiving free medicines in about 14% of the facilities surveyed. These included drugs for conditions such as epilepsy, tuberculosis, leprosy, HIV/AIDS and other chronic conditions. Children under five years receive free medical services. Six health facilities had a functioning therapeutic committee confirmed by the availability of the recent minutes of the committee.

• Lowest priced generics were found to have a median MPR of 2.41 (n=21) for the

medicines in the basket. However, within the lowest priced generics basket the median price ratios ranged from 0.42 for artemether + lumefantrine dispersible tablets to 14.9 for albendazole chewable tablet.

• As in the public sector, no highest price generics were found. That is, only one generic product was found for each medicine at each facility, and this was taken as the lowest‐priced generic.

• More price variation was observed across nongovernmental organization facilities than across private sector facilities. Table 5 shows medicines for which the 25th and 75th percentiles of the price ratio varied by 100% or more.


Table 5: Price variation across nongovernmental organization medicine outlets

Median Price Ratio Medicine

Median 25th percentile

75th percentile

% difference, 25th and 75th

percentile

Epinephrine injection 1.73 1.73 2.46 100% Zinc dispersible tablet 2.33 1.73 2.59 100% Chloramphenicol injection 4.57 3.05 4.57 104% Phenobarbital injection 3.74 3.74 5.61 104% Oral rehydration salts 1.20 0.97 1.48 150% Prednisolone tablet 1.33 1.13 1.77 150% Albendazole chewable tablet 2.16 1.51 2.49 167% Ceftriaxone injection 1.71 1.28 2.13 169% Gentamicin injection 2.41 1.84 3.21 264% Artemether + lumefantrine dispersible tablet 2.63 1.78 3.45 635%

4.4 Cross-sector comparison of patient prices

• Public sector patient prices for the lowest priced generics were on average 19.4% higher than the public sector procurement prices (n=10 medicines). In three cases (co‐trimoxazole suspension, chloramphenicol injection, erythromycin suspension) procurement prices were double those observed in public facilities (Figure 3). In other cases patient prices were comparable to, or significantly higher than, procurement prices. Albendazole chewable tablets cost 16 times the procurement price at health facilities.


Figure 4: Comparison of median price ratios between public procurement prices and public sector facility (patient) prices

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

Co-trim

oxaz

ole

susp

ensio

n

Chlo

ram

phen

icol

inje

ctio

n

Eryt

hrom

ycin

ora

l sus

pens

ion

Hydro

cort

ison

e inje

cton

Oral r

ehyd

ratio

n sa

lts

Benzy

lpen

icill

in in

ject

ion

Epinep

hrin

e in

ject

ion

Ceftria

xone

inje

ctio

n

Pred

niso

lone

tab

Alben

dazo

le c

hew

able

tabl

et

Med

ian

pri

ce r

ati

o

Public procurement (n=1) Public sector facilities (n=47)

• Private sector patient prices for lowest priced generics were one and a half times (154.9%) higher than public sector patient prices (n=12 medicines). The difference in price between medicines in the public sector and the private sector is shown in Table 6. The highest price difference was for artemether + lumefantrine, co‐trimoxazole suspension, chloramphenicol injection, and erythromycin suspension.

• Some medicines with high price ratios in the private sector were not widely available in the public sector (Table 7). Medicines with an availability of less than 10% include albendazole suspension, amoxicillin + clavulanic acid suspension, and vitamin A capsules.


Table 6: Price difference between medicines found in both public and private sectors

Median price ratio

Medicine Public sector Private sector Ratio private: public sector

Albendazole chewable tablet 13.41 14.90 1.1 Prednisolone tablet 2.57 3.42 1.3 Epinephrine injection 2.54 4.33 1.7 Ceftriaxone injection 1.53 2.91 1.9 Benzylpenicillin injection 1.05 2.10 2.0 Furosemide injection 2.88 7.19 2.5 Hydrocortisone injection 0.87 2.16 2.5 Oral rehydration salts 0.83 2.48 3.0 Erythromycin oral suspension 0.35 1.77 5.0 Chloramphenicol injection 0.36 1.87 5.3 Co-trimoxazole suspension 0.37 2.41 6.5 Artemether + lumefantrine dispersible tablet 0.17 1.70 10.0

Table 7: Medicines with median price ratios > 2 in the private sector and their corresponding availability in the public sector

Medicine Median price ratio

Private sector Availability

Public sector Amoxicillin + clavulanic acid suspension 2.28 0.0% Albendazole suspension 3.74 4.3% Vitamin A capsule 8.47 4.3% Vitamin K injection 5.33 28.6% Furosemide injection 7.19 71.4% Prednisolone tablet 3.42 85.7% Ceftriaxone injection 2.91 57.1% Hydrocortisone injection 2.16 44.7% Oral rehydration salts 2.48 57.4% Epinephrine injection 4.33 59.6% Co-trimoxazole suspension 2.41 61.7% Albendazole chewable tablet 14.90 63.8% Benzylpenicillin injection 2.10 87.2%


• Nongovernmental organization sector patient prices for lowest price generics were one and a half times (154.9%) more than public sector patient prices (n=12 medicines). Nongovernmental organization sector prices were slightly more (9.8%) than the private sector prices (n=19 medicines). As observed in the private sector, some of the more expensive medicines in the nongovernmental organization sector were less available in the public sector. Of medicines with median price ratios of over 2 in the nongovernmental organization sector, those with lowest public sector availability are albendazole suspension (4.3%) and gentamicin eye/ear drops (10.6%).

4.5 Affordability

Affordability refers to the cost of treatment in relation to people’s income. In this survey, the daily wage of the lowest paid unskilled government worker was compared to median medicine prices to estimate the number of days’ wages needed to purchase a course of treatment. The daily wage of the lowest paid government worker (8 hrs/day) was found to be US$ 3.03 (TShs 4500).

• Medicines to treat acute conditions were generally affordable in all sectors

(Table 8).

• The cost for the treatment of an acute case of pneumonia (paediatric upper respiratory tract infection) in the nongovernmental organization and private sector was 0.2 days’ wage, when using co‐trimoxazole suspension.

• For malaria, 0.3 days’ wages are needed to purchase artemether + lumefantrine in the private sector while in the public and nongovernmental organization sectors it is provided by a subsidized price.

• For diarrhoea, it would cost 0.1 days’ wage to purchase oral rehydration salts in both private and nongovernmental organization sectors, while zinc dispersible tablets cost 0.7 and 0.4 days’ wages, respectively.

Table 8: Affordability of treating acute conditions: number of days’ wages the lowest-paid government worker would need to spend to purchase lowest priced

generic medicines in the three sectors surveyed

Affordability in days' wages (hours)

Availability (%)

Condition Public Private NGO Public Private NGO Paediatric upper respiratory tract infection • Co-trimoxazole

suspension

0

0.2 (1.6)

0.2 (1.6)

61.7

93.8

87.5

Malaria • Artemether +

lumefantrine dispersible tablet

0

0.3 (2.4)

0

80.9

18.8

52.1

Diarrhoea • Oral rehydration

salts • Zinc dispersible

tablet

0

0.1(0.8)

0.7

0.1 (0.8)

0.4

57.4

72.9

68.8


Table 9 shows the cost of managing the chronic conditions in the three sectors in terms of daysʹ wages of the lowest‐paid government worker. • For chronic conditions, one month’s treatment of asthma with salbutamol

inhaler costs the lowest‐paid government worker 0.9 daysʹ wages if lowest priced generic is used and 1.1 daysʹ wages if the highest priced generic is used. In the nongovernmental organization sector the lowest priced generic costs 0.7 daysʹ wages. Epinephrine costs 0.2 daysʹ wages in the public sector and 0.4 daysʹ wages in each of the private and nongovernmental organization sectors.

• Treatment of hypertension with furosemide costs 0.1 daysʹ wages in both the private and nongovernmental organization sectors.

• For septicaemia, it takes 0.2, 0.4 and 0.3 days’ wages to purchase treatment (ceftriaxone injection) in the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors, respectively.

Table 9: Affordability of treating chronic conditions: number of days’ wages the lowest-paid government worker would need to spend to purchase the lowest

priced generic medicines in the three sectors surveyed

Affordability in daily wages (hours)

Availability (%)

Condition/medicine Public Private NGO Public Private NGO Asthma • Salbutamol inhaler • Epinephrine

0

0.2(1.6)

0.9 (7.2)

0.4(3.2)

0.7(5.6)

0.4(3.2)

14.9

59.6

62.5

20.8

25.0

60.4

Hypertension • Furosemide injection

0

0.1(0.8)

0.1(0.8)

25.5

27.1

52.1

Septicemia • Ceftriaxone injection

0.2(0.8)

0.4(0.8)

0.3(0.8)

42.6

25

22.9

5. DISCUSSION

The World Health Organization Medicines Strategy describes several challenges which limit access to effective pharmaceutical treatment.(19) These include inequitable health financing mechanisms, unreliable medicine supply, problems associated with the quality of medicines, unaffordable medicine prices and irrational use of medicines. Ensuring access to medicines for children is particularly challenging. For example, many essential medicines do not exist in appropriate dosage forms for children. Even where paediatric dosage forms exist, their supply and/or use can be inhibited by several factors, including the higher shipping costs associated with liquid formulations, a lack of clean water for dissolving powders into liquids, and the difficulty of administering different doses to children of different ages. This study measured the availability and prices of medicines for children in Tanzania and assessed their impact on accessibility and affordability.

5.1 Public sector availability

Overall, the availability of medicines for children in the public sector was low. Given that poor and low‐income families access the public sector more than private or nongovernmental organization facilities, one would hope that the medicines would be available and offered at little or no cost. The observed lack of availability is not in


line with the Tanzanian National Medicine Policy, which states the goal to make available to all Tanzanians at all times the essential pharmaceutical products that are of quality, proven effectiveness and acceptable safety at a price that individuals and community can afford, when these are needed to prevent, cure, or reduce illness and suffering. The low availability of medicines in the public sector may be due to the fact that few of the paediatric medicines are licensed and available on the Tanzanian market. Also there is the expectation that some medicines for adults can be split (e.g. halved) to fit childrenʹs dosages. Due to the unavailability of children’s formulations, pharmacists and physicians face problems in providing appropriate medicine dosage forms for children by exploring a range of options, which usually involve reformulating adult medicines to make them suitable for children especially those under five years of age. In the public sector, procurement of medicines is governed mostly by the national essential medicine list and standard treatment guidelines where only generic medicines are encouraged. All public facilities are required to purchase medicines from the Medical Stores Department unless a medicine is out of stock. In the Medical Stores Department, only 27 of the 50 medicines surveyed were in stock at the time of the survey. All the medicines were on the national essential medicines list, which demonstrates adherence to the government medicine policy. The four medicines from the essential medicines list that should have been available but were out of stock were amoxicillin suspension, furosemide injection, beclometasone inhaler, and gentamicin eye/ear drops. The low availability of children’s medicines in the Medical Stores Department, compared to the target of 100% availability of medicines on the national essential medicines list and standard treatment guidelines, needs to be addressed as this affects the availability of medicines in public sector facilities. This was confirmed by the survey, as the mean availability of the medicines in public facilities was only 32.0% for all survey medicines and 45.3% for medicines on the essential medicines list. The low availability observed in the public sector, where children are exempt from cost sharing, will necessitate parents/caretakers to purchase medicines from other sectors where they are more expensive and possibly unaffordable. However, analysis of the availability of individual medicines by therapeutic class across the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors showed that some groups of medicines were not available in all sectors. There is a need to review the national essential medicines list to include dosages for children so that Medical Stores Department can include them in its catalogue and purchase them. During the review, the categorization of medicines’ level should be assessed to ensure conformity with the treatment recommendations within the standard treatment guidelines. For example, salbutamol inhaler is listed only for level D health facilities, regional and referral hospitals, although this treatment is well known to deliver the drug directly to the airways and hence save lives, as indicated in the standard treatment guidelines recommended treatment protocols for asthma.


5.2 Public sector prices

Out of the 50 items surveyed at the Medical Stores Department only three items had prices over 20% higher than international reference prices. A few products with procurement prices higher than public facility prices were noted and the possible explanation for this are the high costs of emergency shipping, such as air transport. There were no highest price generic products in the Medical Stores Department. This is in line with the government policy of procuring only one generic product. In public sector facilities, overall prices of generics were comparable to international reference prices with a median MPR of 0.96. However, a wide range was observed across individual medicines, with albendazole chewable tablet costing 13.41 times the international reference price. These results are similar to the assessment of medicine prices conducted in 2004, using the same methodology, which found that overall medicines cost 1.33 times their international reference price in the public sector.(20) A large variation between the 25% and 75% percentile price ratios was observed for some medicines, namely albendazole chewable tablet, oral rehydration salts, hydrocortisone injection, furosemide injection, ceftriazone injection, chloramphenicol injection, and benzylpenicillin injection. This is an indication that some facilities were charging low prices while others were charging higher prices (up to 4.8 times more) for the same product. This shows that there are no mechanisms for ensuring price equality in the public sector despite the fact that almost all drugs are purchased from the Medical Stores Department. The large variation in prices observed across public sector facilities can be explained by the fact that the implementation of the cost sharing system for charging patients in the public sector varies between and within the regions. In some facilities, such as the tertiary Muhimbili National Hospital in Dar es Salaam, patients were paying a flat rate of TShs 10 000 (US$ 6.73) for outpatient services, which included consultation, investigation and medicines, and TShs 20 000 (US$13.47) for inpatient services. In other public health facilities, patients in outpatient services were paying TShs 1.000 (US$ 0.67) per prescription, regardless of the number of items on the prescription, while for inpatients the cost was approximately TShs 5 000 (US$ 3.37). Children under five and children above five years of age with chronic diseases like tuberculosis, HIV, and diabetes are among those exempted from paying for medical services, including medicines. The total medicine budget for the public sector for 2003/2004, the year of the first medicine price survey, was US$ 28.5 million. The budgets for 2006/2007, 2007/2008, 2008/2009, 2009/2010, and 2010/2011 were US$ 20.3, 31.5, 36, 33.4 and 40.9 million, respectively. Such increments in the pharmaceutical budget however, have not been enough to meet the national medicine needs. Facilities do have additional funds generated from cost sharing with which they are allowed to purchase medicines outside the Medical Stores Department. The reasons why public facilities continue to face stock‐outs despite the existence of this ʺstop gapʺ facility are unknown and warrant further study.


5.3 Private sector availability and patient prices

The mean availability of lowest priced generic medicines in the private sector was only 34.4% for all survey medicines and 46.0% for medicines on the national essential medicines list. Highest price generics were found for 10 medicines, indicating that for these products private sector outlets are stocking at least two generic equivalents. However, availability of these medicines was less than 20% in all cases except paracetamol suspension (31.3%) and albendazole suspension (27.1%). The majority of Tanzanians cannot afford to purchase higher priced products. Therefore, a large number of private retail pharmacies and wholesalers prefer selling one generic medicine rather than offering a choice of products with varying prices. Overall, lowest priced generic medicines in the private sector cost 2.2 times their international reference price. This is reasonable given that reference prices are ex‐factory, without the inclusion of freight and insurance costs, while facility prices include local distribution costs. However, 18% of medicines had prices of over 5 times the international reference price. Albendazole chewable tablets were the most highly priced in comparison to reference prices; the lowest priced and highest priced generics were priced at 13 and 89 times the international reference prices, respectively. High prices relative to international reference prices may represent high acquisition costs and/or high add‐on costs in the supply chain (e.g. wholesaler/retailer mark‐ups, taxes). Overall, lowest priced generic medicines prices showed little variability across private sector medicine outlets.

5.4 Nongovernmental Organization sector patient prices and availability

The mean availability of lowest priced generic medicines was only 32.1% for all survey medicines and 43.2% for medicines on the national essential medicines list. Although nongovernmental organization facilities purchase medicines from Medical Stores Department, they had more volume of medicines in stock than the public sector because they do not depend on Ministry of Health and Social Welfare financial allocations for medicines and have their own funds to purchase elsewhere if medicines are out of stock at Medical Stores Department. The similar availabilities of medicines observed in the public and non‐governmental organization sectors are due to the fact that both sectors follow the government medicine policy and procure most of their medicines from Medical Stores Department. Like the public sector, nongovernmental organization facilities were found to be stocking one generic equivalent per medicine surveyed, as evidenced by the lack of highest priced generic products found. The unavailability of highest priced generic products suggests that either the policy on generic prescription is adhered to in this sector as well or that their prices would be unaffordable to most Tanzanians and therefore having them in stock would create a risk of wastage.

As in public sector health facilities, some nongovernmental organization health facilities were also practicing cost sharing schemes. Nongovernmental organization health facilities in some regions were found to charge flat rates for services. For example, at K’S or Uhai Baptist faith based organization health centres in Mbeya region, it was found that outpatient children were paying TShs 2500 (US$ 1.68). On


the other hand, inpatient children were paying TShs 8000 (US$ 5.39). These charges included medicine, food and other services. In some facilities it was observed that children were receiving free medicines, which were being paid for by their respective parentʹs/caregiverʹs employer (e.g. Tanzania Railway Authority in Mbeya region).

5.5 Intersectoral comparison of patient prices

This survey of medicines prices in Tanzania showed that the prices of childrenʹs medicines vary depending on a number of factors such as the sector in which they are purchased, the type of procurement agent, and the distribution route. Large differences in the prices of the same generic substance were observed between the public, private and nongovernmental organization sectors, and in the private sector, between highest priced generics and their lowest priced generics equivalents. These findings describe a common trend that dominates in poor countries because of inefficient price regulatory mechanisms. As indicated earlier, prices in the public sector were consistently lower than in the private sector. While prices in both sectors were generally reasonable compared to international reference prices, large variations were observed across individual medicines with some costing several times more than international reference prices. This could be attributed to some pharmacies getting a discount by buying their products in bulk from suppliers and in turn selling medicines at a lower cost so as to increase turnover and profit. The findings in our survey also showed that medicine prices varied from facility to facility, especially in the private and nongovernmental organization sectors.

5.6 Affordability to patients

While one issue is the price of medicines, another is whether people can afford them, regardless of how cheap or expensive they are. In this study, affordability was determined by comparing the cost of treatment with people’s income. The monthly wage of the lowest paid unskilled government worker (TShs 135 000 or US$ 90.91) and the median medicine prices found at the sample facilities were used to calculate the number of days’ wages needed to purchase standard courses of treatment. The study found that the cost to the patient varied considerably between the public, the private and nongovernmental organization sectors. In general, a patient or parent/guardian had to work more to be able to purchase medicines from the private and nongovernmental organization sectors.

Since the number of highest price generic products was limited, it was impossible to compare the affordability between highest price generic and lowest price generic products. In all the conditions it was more expensive to be treated in the private and nongovernmental organization sectors. For example, it was two times more expensive to treat septicemia with ceftriaxone in the private sector than in the public sector. However, consultation fees, diagnostic tests, and other costs were not included in these prices meaning that the total treatment cost would be considerably higher.

The issue of medicine affordability is of paramount importance when access to medicines is considered. In Tanzania about 2.3 million people (13%) of the workforce are unemployed. The situation is worse in the rural areas and also amongst the youth. According to the Household Budget Survey of 2000‐2001 the proportion of the


population below national basic needs poverty line is 35.7% and these obviously are not covered by the national health insurance fund.(21) The majority of unemployed populations have monthly incomes of approximately TShs 40 000 (US$ 26.93), which is well below the measure used in calculating affordability in this study. For these populations, particularly for families in rural areas, affordability of medicines is likely to be much worse than the findings of this survey indicate and this may undermine the objectives of the National Medicine Policy.

6. CONCLUSIONS

From this study of the availability and price of paediatric medicines in Tanzania, the following can be concluded: Availability of paediatric medicines:

• In the public sector procurement agency, the Medical Stores Department, only 27 of the 50 medicines surveyed were in stock at the time of the survey.

• In the public sector, the overall availability of childrenʹs medicines was low with mean availability of 32.0%, while the availability of medicines on the national essential medicines list was higher at 45.3%. Public health facilities are only stocking one generic product for each medicine.

• In the private sector, overall availability of lowest priced generic medicines in the basket was low (34.4%). Only 10 highest priced generic products were found suggesting that private facilities are generally only stocking one generic product for each medicine.

• Overall availability of childrenʹs medicines in the nongovernmental organization sector was low with mean availability of 32.1%. Availability of medicines on the national essential medicines list was higher at 43.2%. Nongovernmental organization health facilities are only stocking one generic product for each medicine.

• In the private sector medicines were, on average, more available in urban facilities (retail pharmacies) than in rural facilities (medical stores/accredited drug dispensing outlets, while in the public and nongovernmental organization sectors availability did not vary significantly between urban and rural areas.

• Anticonvulsants, opioid analgesics, zinc dispersible tablets, and certain antibiotics (e.g. ceftriaxone injection, gentamicin injection) showed consistently low availability across all three sectors. The categorization of salbutamol inhaler as a level D medicine in the national essential medicines list limits its availability at lower levels of care. Beclometasone inhaler also displays poor availability in all three sectors.

Public sector procurement prices:

• Overall, paediatric medicines procurement prices were below international reference prices with a median MPR of 0.80, however the prices of certain injectables (epinephrine, gentamicin, phenobarbital) were substantially higher than international reference prices.


• All of the available paediatric medicines were on the national essential medicines list.

Public sector facility prices:

• Overall, generic medicine prices were comparable to international reference prices with a median MPR of 0.96, however the prices of some medicines were more than double international reference prices.

• About 50% (6 of 12) of the lowest priced generic medicines had large price variations across individual facilities.

• Only 38.3% (18 of 50) of the facilities were either charging a flat rate or giving free medicines.

Private sector facility prices:

• Highest priced generics cost, on average, 1.96 times the price of the equivalent lowest priced generics.

• For lowest priced generics, median prices were 2.22 times the international reference price, however one‐quarter of the medicines in the basket had median price ratios greater than 3.66.

• Overall, medicines prices showed little variability across private sector medicine outlets, however substantial inter‐facility variation was observed for epinephrine injection, vitamin K injection and prednisolone tablet.

Nongovernmental organization facility prices:

• For lowest priced generics, median prices were 2.41 times the international reference price.

• More price variation was observed across nongovernmental organization facilities than across private sector facilities.

• Of the 48 facilities surveyed, only 14% (n=29) were charging patients a flat rate.

Difference in prices between sectors:

• Public sector patient prices for the lowest priced generics were on average 19.4% higher than the public sector procurement prices.

• Private sector patient prices for lowest priced generics were one and a half times (154.9%) higher than public sector patient prices.

• Nongovernmental organization sector patient prices for lowest price generics were one and a half times (154.9 %) more than public sector patient prices.

• Nongovernmental organization sector prices were slightly more (9.8%) than the private sector prices.


Affordability of medicines:

• Treatments for both acute and chronic conditions are generally affordable for the lowest‐paid government worker. However, for the large sections of the population who earn less or are unemployed, purchasing treatment for their children may not be affordable.

• For malaria, 0.3 days’ wages are needed to purchase artemether + lumefantrine in the private sector while in the public and nongovernmental organization it is provided as a subsidized medicine.

• One month’s treatment of asthma with a salbutamol inhaler costs the lowest‐paid government worker 0.9 daysʹ wages if a lowest priced generic is used and 1.1 daysʹ wages if the originator is used. In the nongovernmental organization sector the lowest priced generic costs 0.7 daysʹ wages.

7. Recommendations

• The availability of essential medicines in Medical Stores Department should be 100%.

• More efforts should be made to include paediatric dosage forms on the national essential medicines.

• The pull system of public sector supply, using requisitions, should be strengthened. For example, the quantification of morbidity data should be enforced to provide the basis for calculation of medicine requirements in all health facilities.

• Cost sharing should be made uniform across health facilities.

• To avoid stock‐outs of childrenʹs formulations, local manufacturers should be encouraged to produce more varieties of essential medicine for children.

• The hospital therapeutic committees should be strengthened to improve rational use of medicines, particularly at the facility level.


REFERENCES

1. Medicines for children, Fact sheet N°341, June 2010. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2010.

2. Health Sector Strategic Plan III, 2009‐2015. United Republic of Tanzania, Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, 2009.

3. Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey 2009‐2010. United Republic of Tanzania, 2010.

4. Mkakati wa Kukuza Uchumi na Kupunguza Umaskini Tanzania ‐ National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty II, 2010‐2014. United Republic of Tanzania, 2010.

5. Economic Survey. United Republic of Tanzania, 2007.

6. Health Systems 20/20 Health Systems Database [online database] (http://www.healthsystems2020.org/).

7. National Drug Policy. United Republic of Tanzania, Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, 1991.

8. Standard Treatment Guidelines and the National Essential Medicines List for Mainland Tanzania, 3rd edition. United Republic of Tanzania, Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, 2007.

9. The World Medicines Situation. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2004.

10. Massele AY, Ofori‐Adjei D, Laing RO. A study of prescribing patterns with special reference to drug use indicators in Dar es Salaam Region, Tanzania. Tropical Doctor, 1993, 23:104‐7.

11. Massele AY, Mwaluko GM. A study of prescribing patterns at different health care facilities in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. East African Medical Journal, 1994, 71:314‐6.

12. Massele AY, Nsimba SE. Comparison of drug utilisation in public and private primary health care clinics in Tanzania. East African Medical Journal, 1997, 74:420‐2.

13. Massele AY, Nsimba SE, Rimoy G. Prescribing habits in church‐owned primary health care facilities in Dar es Salaam and other Tanzanian coast regions. East African Medical Journal, 2001, 78:510‐4..

14. Nsimba SE, Massele AY, Makonomalonja J. Assessing prescribing practice in church‐owned primary healthcare (PHC) institutions in Tanzania: a pilot study. Tropical Doctor, 2004, 34:236‐8.

15. Le Grand A, Haaijer‐Ruskamp F, Hogerzeil H. Intervention research in rational use of drugs: a review. Health Policy and Planning, 1999, 14(2):89–102.

16. Measuring medicine prices, availability, affordability and price components, 2nd edition. Geneva, World Health Organization and Health Action International, 2008.

17. Globalization and Access to medicines: Perspectives on the WTO/TRIPS Agreement. Geneva, World Health Organization, 1999 (WHO/DAP/98.9, revised, 1999).

18. International Drug Price Indicator Guide, 2009 edition. Cambridge, Management Sciences for Health, 2009.

19. Continuity and Change: Implementing the third WHO Medicines strategy. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2010.

20. Medicine prices in Tanzania. Geneva, World Health Organization/Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, 2004.

21. Household Budget Survey 2000‐2001. United Republic of Tanzania, National Bureau of Statistics, 2001.


BIBILIOGRAPHY

Bollinger L. HIV/AIDS and its Impact on Trade and Commerce. In: Forsythe S, State of the Art: AIDS

and Economics, Policy Project, Futures Group, Washington, 2002:38‐48.

Conroy S. Unlicensed and off‐label drug use: issues and recommendations. Paediatric Drugs, 2002, 4(6):353‐9.

The Lancet. Rational use of medicines. Lancet, 2010, 375(9731):2052.

Tanzania Service Provision Assessment Survey. United Republic of Tanzania, Ministry of Health and Social Welfare and National Bureau of Statistics, 2006.

Baseline survey of the pharmaceutical sector in Tanzania 2002. Geneva, Ministry of Health and Social Welfare/World Health Organization, 2002.

Press statement on accreditation of pharmacies. United Republic of Tanzania, National Health Insurance Fund/Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, 2 October 2003.

Olcay M and Laing R. Pharmaceutical tariffs: what is their effect on prices, protection of local industry and revenue generation? Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation and Public Health, 2005.

On the rational use of paediatric medicines. Papers Download Centre, 2007 (http://eng.hi138.com/?i136709 Posted:2007‐8‐6 16:58:00).

Perez‐Casas C, Ford N, Herranz E. Pricing of Drugs and Donations: Options for sustainable equity pricing. Tropical Medicine and International Health, 2001, 6 (11):960‐964.

Perez‐Casas C, Ford N, Herranz E. Pharmaceuticals, and Parallel Trade. Competition Law Insight, 2003.

Hospital, the phenomenon of irrational drug use and intervention. Medicine Papers – Professional Medicine Papers, 2009 (http://eng.hi138.com/?i206887 Posted:2009‐12‐23 16:10:00).

Sources and Prices of selected drugs and diagnostics for people living with HIV/AIDS. Geneva, World Health Organization in collaboration with UNICEF/UNAIDS/MSF, 2002 (WHO/EDM/PAR/2002.2).


ANNEXES

Annex 1: Timetable of survey

Country: TANZANIA Activities Date

Train area supervisors/data collectors 10 – 12 November 2010

Data Collection period 14 – 24 November 2010

Data analysis 25 November 2010

Preparation of draft report 1 – 20 December 2010


Annex 2: Medicines data collection form used for survey

Facility Name:

Address of facility:

Urban vs Rural health facility: (tick) Urban Rural

Region: Telephone Email:

Facility No:

Address of facility:

Urban vs Rural health facility: (tick) Urban Rural

Region: Telephone Email: Fax:

Facility No:

Type of health facility: (tick) Public Level of care

Primary Secondary Tertiary

Mission Private

Therapeutic committee available.

(If “yes”. Ask to see last meeting’s minutes)

Name and title of data collector: Name of manager of facility/disperser: ‐

Date: (DD/MM/YYYY) / / /


INSTRUCTIONS

1. Facility information: Make sure that you fill all cells of the above table. If fax or e‐mail don’t exist put “N/A” to indicate not available

2. Identifying products for price survey: • Identify products with the exact strength and dosage form (if available) listed for each medicine that are physically available for sale or dispensing on the day of the data collection. • Make sure that you do not mistakenly include products that are different strengths or different formulations (e.g. slow release tablet instead of regular tablet; or nasal spray instead of inhaler; or

combination products which include another active ingredient) • Look for products that have the recommended pack size. If products with the recommended pack size are not available then select the next larger pack size. • Do not write down price information if the correct product is not physically available on the day of data collection in the health facility. Put “No” in ʺAvailable?ʺ column name to indicate not available • Indicate whether the product is expired on the comment column. • For ORS, comment whether is Low Osmolarity.

3. Recording data for price survey: • You MUST write down the product name (e.g. trade name or brand name), the name of the manufacturer, actual pack size, and pack price found for the products with the highest and lowest unit price (i.e. price per capsule, tablet, millilitre, dose)

• For any given medicine, if there is only one product available, record data on this product in the row for the ʺlowest priceʺ product. • Discounts: Record the discounted price in the ʺPack priceʺ column only when same discount is available for all patients • If medicines are free to patients in public sector facilities then record availability and all product details and write ʺFʺ in the Pack Price Found cell

4. Calculating the unit price: • Calculate the unit price after data collection, not at the facility as it will be too time consuming • Divide the recorded pack price by the actual pack size found and write it down with up to four decimals (eg 0.1234) in the Unit Price cell. If the discount is applied for all patients, then calculate the unit

price from the discounted pack price only.

5. Final steps: • Please check that all data is correctly recorded and double check unit price calculations before sending the data collection forms to the Survey Manager • Keep photocopies of completed data collection forms and send originals as soon as possible to: Prof Mary Justin‐Temu: [email protected], [email protected] • Send original data collection forms by post to: Prof Mary Justin‐Temu P.O. box 65013 Dar es Salaam • If you have any questions please phone the survey manager at mobile 0784 320558 or landline2151244 or e‐mail shown above.


Medicine name, dosage form, strength

Recommended pack size

Product of interest

Available? (“Yes” or

“No”)

Product name

(brand/ trade name)

Manufacturer, country of

manufacture

Pack size

found Pack price

Discount for all patients

Tick Yes No (%)

Unit price (4 digits)

Comments and observation

i.e. if product is

expired

Highest price /tab Albendazole chewable tablet 200 mg 2

Lowest price /tab

Highest price /ml Albendazole suspension 100 mg/5 ml

20 ml Lowest price /ml

Highest price /ml

Lowest price /ml Amoxicillin suspension 125 mg/5 ml

100 ml

Lowest price /ml

Highest price /ml Amoxicillin /clavulanic acid suspension 125 mg + 31 mg/5 mI

100 ml Lowest price

/ml

Highest price /tab Amoxicillin /clavulanic acid dispersible tablet 250 mg + 125 mg

21 Lowest price /tab

Highest price / tab Artemether + lumefrantrine tablet 20 mg + 120 mg dispersible

6 Lowest price

/tab

Highest price /dose Beclometasone Inhaler 100 mcg/dose

1 inhaler (200 doses)

Lowest price /dose

Highest price /vial Benzylpenicillin 1 MU = 600 mg/vial

1 vial Lowest price

/vial




Product of interest


“No”)

Product name

(brand/ trade name)


manufacture

Pack size

found Pack price


Tick Yes No (%)



i.e. if product is

expired

Highest price /ml Carbamazepine suspension 100 mg/5 ml

100 Lowest price /ml

Highest price /tab Carbimazepine chewable tablet 100 mg


Highest price /unit Canula 24 g 1

Lowest price /unit

Highest price /vial Ceftriaxone injection 500 mg/vial

1 vial Lowest price /vial

Highest price /vial Chloramphenicol injection 1 mg/vial


Highest price /tab Co‐trimoxazole tab, 20 mg trim + 100 mg suplhamethoxazole

15 Lowest price

/tab

Highest price /ml Co‐trimoxazole suspension 200 mg + 40 mg/5 ml)

100 ml Lowest price

/ml

Highest price /ml Diazepam rectal solution 2.5 mg/ml

0.5 ml Lowest price /ml

Highest price

/ml Diazepam 2 mg/2 ml Amp

Lowest price

/ml




Product of interest


“No”)

Product name

(brand/ trade name)


manufacture

Pack size

found Pack price


Tick Yes No (%)



i.e. if product is

expired

Highest price /tab Digoxin 62.5 μg tablet 100

Lowest price

/tab

Highest price /amp Epinephrine (Adrenaline) 1 mg/ml

1 ml ampoule Lowest price

/amp

Highest price /ml Erythromycin oral suspension 125 mg/5 ml


Highest price /ml Ferrous Sulphate 30mg per 5 ml suspension

100 ml Lowest price

/ml

Highest price /ml Furosemide injection 20 mg/2 ml

ampoule Lowest price /ml

Highest price /ml Gentamicin eye/ear drops 0.5%


Highest price /amp Gentamicin injection 10 mg/ml

1 ampoule Lowest price /amp

Highest price /vial Hydroscortisone injection 100 mg


Isoniazid scored tablet 50 mg

56 Highest price

/tab




Product of interest


“No”)

Product name

(brand/ trade name)


manufacture

Pack size

found Pack price


Tick Yes No (%)



i.e. if product is

expired

Highest price

/tab Lamivudine 150 mg tablet (3TC)


Highest price /ml Morphine oral 10 mg/5 ml 100 ml

Lowest price

/ml

Highest price /tab Morphine immediate 10 mg tablet

Lowest price

/tab

Highest price

/test MRDT ‐ Rapid diagnostic test for falciparum malaria

pc Lowest price

/test

Highest price /tab Nalidixic acid 250 mg 100

Lowest price /tab

Highest price /ml Nevirapine syrup 50 mg/5 ml


Highest price

/ml Normal Saline 0.9% 500 ml

Lowest price /ml

Highest price /ml Nystatin drops 100,000 IU/ml

30 ml Lowest price

/ml




Product of interest


“No”)

Product name

(brand/ trade name)


manufacture

Pack size

found Pack price


Tick Yes No (%)



i.e. if product is

expired

Highest price /packet Low osmolarity? YesORS sachet to make 1 litre

of solution 1 sachet

Lowest price /packet Low osmolarity? Yes

Highest price /ml Paracetamol suspension 120 mg/5 ml or 125 mg/5 ml


Highest price /ml Phenobarbital 15 mg/5 ml 100 ml

Lowest price /ml

Highest price /ml Phenobarbitone injection 200 mg/ml

100 ml Lowest price /mll

Highest price /ml Phenytoin suspension 25 or 30 mg/5 ml


Highest price /tab Phenytoin chewable tablet 50 mg


Highest price /tab Prednisolone 5 mg tablet 100

Lowest price /tab

Highest price /vial Procaine penicillin injection 1mg/MIU

vial Lowest price /vial

Highest price /tab

Pyrazinamide (Z) 600 mg tablet

100 Lowest price

/tab




Product of interest


“No”)

Product name

(brand/ trade name)


manufacture

Pack size

found Pack price


Tick Yes No (%)



i.e. if product is

expired

Highest price /ml Quinine 600 mg/2 ml injection

ampoule Lowest price /ml

Highest price /ml Rifampicin suspension 100 mg/5 ml


Highest price

/ml

Sodium lactate comp (Ringers sol.)

500ml Lowest price /ml

Highest price /tab Salbutamol 2 mg tablet 100

Lowest price /tab

Highest price /dose

Lowest price /dose Salbutamol inhaler 100 mcg/dose

1 inhaler ‐ 200 doses

Lowest price /gram

Highest price

/amp Vitamin K1 injection 10 mg/ ml

1 ampoule

Lowest price /amp

Highest price /cap Vitamin A 100,000 IU capsules (30 mg)

100 Lowest price

/cap

Highest price /tab Zinc 20 mg dispersible tablets

100 Lowest price

/tab


Annex 3: List of facilities and outlets sampled

GEOGRAPHICAL AREA: DAR ES SALAAM REGION

Public Sector Private sector NGO sector Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural

Muhimbili National Hospital

Kwembe Dispensary

C.N. Pharmacy Mbweni Medics medical store

Aga Khan Hospital

Cardinary Rugambwa mission Hospital

Mwananyamala Hospital

Bweni Dispensary :

Salama Pharmacy

G.P. Medicines medical store

Hindu Mandal Hospital

Kibangu mission Hospital

Sinza Health Centre

Kibamba Dispensary

Segerea Pharmacy

Mbweni Ubungo Medics

Buruhani Health Centre

Luguruni mission dispensary

Amana Hospital Kinyerezi Dispensary

Arafa Pharmacy Mbutu medics store

Mikocheni mission Hospital

Mbweni mission Health Centre

GEOGRAPHICAL AREA: SHINYANGA REGION


Shinyanga Regional Hospital

Runguya Health Centre

Sun Palm Pharmacy

Kitapondya Pharmacy

Kalanfdoto AIC (T) Hospital

Igaririmu Health Centre

Chamabuha Dispensary

Ushetu Dispensary

Shinyanga Pharmacy

Jonson BLDB Pharmacy

Muhajirina Bakwata Dispensary

Mpera health Centre

Kambarage Dispensary

Isaka Dispensary Libya Pharmacy Nyamonge Sokoni BLDB

RC Ngokoro Dispensary

Mbulu Dispensary

Mawaza Dispensary

Lalago Health Centre

Ng’orongo DLDB

Kadama Pharmacy

KKKT Dispensary

Magai Hospital

GEOGRAPHICAL AREA: MANYARA REGION


Bahati Town Council Hospital

Magugu Health Centre

Ikizu Pharmacy Gracious Medics Wazazi Dispensary

Dareda Hospital

Nkaiti Health Centre

Galapo Health Centre

Eagle Pharmacy Timberland Medics

Sabilo Dispensary

Zaci Galapo Dispensary

Kiongozi Dispensary

Dareda Kati Dispensary

Waida Pharmacy Vumilia Medics Police Dispensary

Wazazi Galapo Dispensary

Minjingu Dispensary

Top In One Medics

Kamba Medics Magereza Dispensary

St. Imaculata Health Centre


GEOGRAPHICAL AREA: MBEYA REGION


Kiwanjampaka Health Centre

Rungwe District Hospital

Mina Pharmacy Tukuyu Medical Store

Tazara Dispensary

Uyole Hospital

Mbeya Referral Hospital

Kiwira Dispensary

Msafiri Pharmacy

Yubaha Medical Store

GM Dispensary Mbalizi Hospital

Mbeya Regional Hospital

Igawilo Health Centre

Selya Day and Night Pharmacy

Mwakifuna Medical Store

K’S Hospital – Uhai Bapt

Igogwe Hospital

Ruanda Health Center

Inyala‐ Uhai Health Centre

Galatia Pharmacy

Stephene Medical Store

Iyunga Health Centre

Tukuyu (KKKT) Health Centre

GEOGRAPHICAL AREA: MTWARA REGION


Ligula Hospital Likombe Health Centre

Bustand Pharmacy

Twalibu ADDO Somo Dispensary

Ndanda Mission

Mkomaindo Hospital

Chisegu Dispensary

Samira Pharmacy

Salama ADDO SDA Mission Dispensary

Nanyamba Mission Health Centre

Neawala Hospital

Nanguruwe Health Centre

Chambila Pharmacy

Masasi Peak ADDO

Shangani Mission Dispensary

Sajora Dispensary

Tandahimba Hospital

Mkuti Dispensary

ABC Medics Laumbe Med Store ADDO

Bakwata Dispensary

Chikumba Dispensary

GEOGRAPHICAL AREA: TABORA REGION


Tabora (Kitete) Regional Hospital

Manoleo Dispensary

Kavula Pharmacy

Semeni Medical Store

WMCA Dispensary

Ndala Mission Hospital

Isevya Dispensary

Magili Dispensary :

RM Medics Usoke Medical Store

SDA Dispensary Kipalapala Mission Dispensary

Town Council Clinic

Mayombo Dispensary

Mmdawa Enterprise Pharmacy

Umulinga Medical Store

St Anne Health Centre

Msele Medical Dispensary

Malolo Dispensary

Usoke Health Centre

IDA Pharmacy Huruma Medical Store

St Philip Health Centre

Usoke Mission Dispensary


Annex 4: List of the paediatric medicines surveyed

MEDICINE MEDICINE STRENGTH

DOSAGE FORM TARGET

PACK SIZE

1. Albendazole chewable tablet 200mg chewable tab 2 2. Albendazole suspension 100mg/5ml millilitre 10 3. Amoxicillin suspension 125mg/5ml millilitre 100 4. Amoxicillin+clavulanic acid suspension 125mg+31mg/5ml millilitre 100 5. Amoxicillin+clavulanic acid tab dispersible 250mg+125mg dispersible tab 21 6. Artemether+lumefantrine dispersible tab 20mg+120mg dispersible tab 6 7. Beclometasone inhaler 100mcg/dose dose 200 8. Benzylpenicillin injection 5MU (3g) vial 1 9. Carbamazepine suspension 100mg/5ml millilitre 100 10. Carbamazepine tab chewable 100mg chewable tab 20 11. Canula 24g unit 1 12. Ceftriaxone injection 250mg/vial vial 1 13. Chloramphenicol injection 1gm/vial vial 1 14. Co - trimoxazole tab 20mg+100mg tab 15 15. Co-trimoxazole suspension 8+40 mg/ml millilitre 100 16. Diazepam rectal solution 2.5mg/ml millilitre 0.5 17. Diazepam injection 2mg/2ml ampoule 1 18. Digoxin tab 62.5 µg tab 100 19. Epinephrine injection 1mg/ml ampoule 1 20. Erythromycin oral suspension 125mg/5ml millilitre 100 21. Ferrous sulphate suspension 30mg/5ml millilitre 100 22. Frusemide injection 20mg/2ml ampoule 1 23. Gentamycin eye/ear drops 0.3% millilitre 10 24. Gentamycin injection 10mg/ml ampoule 1 25. Hydrocortisone injecton 100mg vial 1 26. Isoniazid scored tab 50mg tab 56 27. Lamivudine (3TC) tab 150mg tab 60 28. Lamivudine suspension 50mg/5ml millilitre 100 29. Morphine oral suspension 10mg/5ml millilitre 100 30. Morphine tab immed release 10mg tab 31. MRDT (Rapid Diagnostic Test for

Falciparum malaria) test 1 32. Nalidixic acid tab 250mg tab 100 33. Nevirapine syrup 50mg/5ml millilitre 100 34. Normal saline 0.9% millilitre 500 35. Nystatin drops 100,000IU/ml millilitre 30 36. Oral rehydration solution to make 1L sachet 1 37. Paracetamol suspension 24 or 25 mg/ml millilitre 100 38. Phenobarbital injection 200mg/ml millilitre 100 39. Phenytoin suspension 25or30mg/ml millilitre 500 40. Phenytoin tab chewable 50mg tab 90 41. Prednisolone tab 5mg tab 100 42. Pyrazinamide tab 400mg tab 100 43. Quinine injection 600mg/2ml millilitre 44. Rifampicin suspension 100mg/5ml millilitre 100 45. Ringers soln - sodium lactate comp. millilitre 500 46. Salbutamol tab 2mg tab 100 47. Salbutamol inhaler 100 mcg/dose dose 200 48. Vitamin K1 injection 10mg/ml ampoule 1 49. Vitamin A cap 50,000 IU (15mg) cap 100 50. Zinc dispersible tablet 20mg dispersible tab 100


Annex 5: Analysis summary sheets

A5.1 Summary data from individual sectors A) Public sector procurement

B) Public Health Facilities Sector


C) Private sector pharmacies

D) NGO sector facilities (other sector)


A5.2 Comparisons of availability and price across sectors


A5.3 Availability and price results by individual medicine


A5.4 Summary of affordability results

Asthma

Select Medicine NameMedicine Strength

Dosage Form

Treatment Duration (in Days)

Total # of Units per Treatment Product Type

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

PriceDays'

Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' WagesSalbutamol2 inhaler 100 mcg/dose dose as needed 200 Brand 5000.00 1.1

Lowest Price 4025.00 0.9 3250.00 0.7

Diarrhoea


Dosage Form



Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

PriceDays'

Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' WagesOral rehydration solution to make 1L sachet 2 1 Brand

Lowest Price 100.00 0.0 300.00 0.1 300.00 0.1

Diarrhoea


Dosage Form



Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

PriceDays'

Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' WagesZinc dispersible tablet 20mg dispersible 10 30 Brand

Lowest Price 3000.00 0.7 1650.00 0.4

Meningitis


Dosage Form



Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

PriceDays'

Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' WagesCeftriaxone injection 250mg/vial vial 10 1 Brand

Lowest Price 1000.00 0.2 1900.00 0.4 1550.00 0.3

Severe malnutririon


Dosage Form



Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

PriceDays'

Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' WagesGentamycin injection 10mg/ml ampoule 10 10 Brand

Lowest Price 5000.00 1.1

Septicemia


Dosage Form



Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

PriceDays'

Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' WagesCeftriaxone injection 250mg/vial vial 10 1 Brand

Lowest Price 1000.00 0.2 1900.00 0.4 1550.00 0.3

Hyperstension


Dosage Form



Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

PriceDays'

Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' WagesFrusemide injection 20mg/2ml ampoule 5 1 Brand

Lowest Price 200.00 0.0 500.00 0.1 500.00 0.1

Paediatric respiratory infection


Dosage Form



Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

PriceDays'

Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' WagesCo-trimoxazole suspension 8+40 mg/ml millilitre 7 70 Brand

Lowest Price 160.37 0.0 1050.00 0.2 1050.00 0.2

Malaria


Dosage Form



Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

PriceDays'

Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' WagesArtemether+lumefantrine dispers20mg+120mg dispersible 3 2 Brand

Lowest Price 100.00 0.0 1000.00 0.2 250.00 0.1

Adult respiratory infection


Dosage Form



Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

PriceDays'

Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages1 1 Brand

Lowest Price

Epilepsy


Dosage Form



Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

PriceDays'

Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' WagesPhenobarbital injection 200mg/ml millilitre 3 2 Brand

Lowest Price 2200.00 0.5

Helmentics


Dosage Form



Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

PriceDays'

Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' WagesAlbendazole chewable tablet 200mg chewable ta 1 2 Brand 3000.00 0.7

Lowest Price 450.00 0.1 500.00 0.1 500.00 0.1

Pain/inflammation


Dosage Form



Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

PriceDays'

Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' WagesParacetamol suspension 24 or 25 mg/ml millilitre 3 45 Brand 1125.00 0.3

Lowest Price 450.00 0.1 607.50 0.1

Oral thrush


Dosage Form



Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' Wages

Median Treatment

PriceDays'

Wages

Median Treatment

Price Days' WagesNystatin drops 100,000IU/ml millilitre 7 10 Brand

Lowest Price 666.67 0.1 666.67 0.1

Other

Public Sector

Public Sector Private Sector Other

Private Sector Other


Public Sector

Public Sector



Other

Other

OtherPublic Sector


Private Sector

Public Sector

Public Sector Private Sector

Private Sector

Public Sector Private Sector





Other2

Other2

Other2

Other2

Other2

Other2

Other2

Other2

Other2

Other2

Other2

Other2

Other2

Other2

WHO | Tanzania assessment prices

Documents

Transcript of WHO | Tanzania assessment prices