IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pgph00/0000827.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Implementing essential diagnostics-learning from essential medicines: A scoping review

Author

Listed:
  • Moriasi Nyanchoka
  • Mercy Mulaku
  • Bruce Nyagol
  • Eddy Johnson Owino
  • Simon Kariuki
  • Eleanor Ochodo

Abstract

The World Health Organization (WHO) model list of Essential In vitro Diagnostic (EDL) introduced in 2018 complements the established Essential Medicines List (EML) and improves its impact on advancing universal health coverage and better health outcomes. We conducted a scoping review of the literature on implementing the WHO essential lists in Africa to inform the implementation of the recently introduced EDL. We searched eight electronic databases for studies reporting on implementing the WHO EDL and EML in Africa. Two authors independently conducted study selection and data extraction, with disagreements resolved through discussion. We used the Supporting the Use of Research Evidence (SURE) framework to extract themes and synthesised findings using thematic content analysis. We used the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 to assess the quality of included studies. We included 172 studies reporting on EDL and EML after screening 3,813 articles titles and abstracts and 1,545 full-text papers. Most (75%, n = 129) studies were purely quantitative in design, comprising descriptive cross-sectional designs (60%, n = 104), 15% (n = 26) were purely qualitative, and 10% (n = 17) had mixed-methods approaches. There were no qualitative or randomised experimental studies about EDL. The main barrier facing the EML and EDL was poorly equipped health facilities—including unavailability or stock-outs of essential in vitro diagnostics and medicines. Financial and non-financial incentives to health facilities and workers were key enablers in implementing the EML; however, their impact differed from one context to another. Only fifty-six (33%) of the included studies were of high quality. Poorly equipped and stocked health facilities remain an implementation barrier to essential diagnostics and medicines. Health system interventions such as financial and non-financial incentives to improve their availability can be applied in different contexts. More implementation study designs, such as experimental and qualitative studies, are required to evaluate the effectiveness of essential lists.

Suggested Citation

  • Moriasi Nyanchoka & Mercy Mulaku & Bruce Nyagol & Eddy Johnson Owino & Simon Kariuki & Eleanor Ochodo, 2022. "Implementing essential diagnostics-learning from essential medicines: A scoping review," PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(12), pages 1-29, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0000827
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0000827
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0000827
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0000827&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pgph.0000827?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elizabeth F Peacocke & Sonja L Myhre & Hakan Safaralilo Foss & Unni Gopinathan, 2022. "National adaptation and implementation of WHO Model List of Essential Medicines: A qualitative evidence synthesis," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(3), pages 1-23, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thomas Piggott & Lorenzo Moja & Carlos A Cuello Garcia & Elie A Akl & Rita Banzi & Benedikt Huttner & Tamara Kredo & John N Lavis & Holger J Schünemann, 2024. "User-experience testing of an evidence-to-decision framework for selecting essential medicines," PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(1), pages 1-15, January.
    2. Bereket Bahiru Tefera & Chernet Tafere & Adane Yehualaw & Ephrem Mebratu & Yalelet Chanie & Simachew Ayele & Sewnet Adane, 2022. "Availability and stock-out duration of essential medicines in Shegaw Motta general hospital and Motta Health Centre, North West Ethiopia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(9), pages 1-10, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0000827. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: globalpubhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.