IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0225429.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Withdrawn medicines included in the essential medicines lists of 136 countries

Author

Listed:
  • Onella Charles
  • Igho Onakpoya
  • Simran Benipal
  • Hannah Woods
  • Anjli Bali
  • Jeffrey K Aronson
  • Carl Heneghan
  • Nav Persaud

Abstract

Background: Essential medicines lists and related policies are intended to meet the priority health needs of populations and their implementation is associated with more appropriate use of medicines. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that countries carefully select the medicines to be included in their national essential medicines lists. Lists that are used to prioritize access to important treatments should not include medicines that have been withdrawn elsewhere because of an unfavourable benefit-to-harm balance; however, countries still list and use medicines that have been withdrawn worldwide. The objective of this study was to determine whether the national essential medicines lists of 137 countries include medicines that have been withdrawn in other countries. Methods and findings: We performed an audit of national essential medicines lists for medicines that had been withdrawn. Medicines withdrawn from worldwide markets between 1953 and 2014 were identified using a systematic review of published literature and regulatory documents. The reviewers used sources including the WHO’s database of drugs, PubMed, and the websites of regulatory agencies to obtain information regarding adverse effects associated with the medicines, the year of first withdrawal, markets of withdrawal, and the level of evidence supporting each withdrawal. We recorded the number of countries with a withdrawn medicine included in their national medicines list, the number of withdrawn medicines included in each nation’s list, and the number of national essential medicines including each withdrawn medicine. 97 medicines were withdrawn in at least one country but still included in one more national essential medicines list. Of 137 countries with a national essential medicines list, 136 lists included at least one withdrawn medicine, with 54% of the lists containing 5 or fewer withdrawn medicines, and 27% including 10 or more withdrawn medicines. 11 medicines were withdrawn worldwide but still included on at least one national essential medicines list. Countries with longer essential medicines lists had more withdrawn medicines included in their lists. Conclusions: This study found that withdrawn medicines are included in all but one national essential medicines list, representing a need for more stringent processes for selecting and removing medicines on these lists. Countries may wish to apply special scrutiny to medicines withdrawn in other nations when selecting medicines to include on their lists.

Suggested Citation

  • Onella Charles & Igho Onakpoya & Simran Benipal & Hannah Woods & Anjli Bali & Jeffrey K Aronson & Carl Heneghan & Nav Persaud, 2019. "Withdrawn medicines included in the essential medicines lists of 136 countries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-12, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0225429
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0225429
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0225429
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0225429&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0225429?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. Kathleen Anne Holloway & David Henry, 2014. "WHO Essential Medicines Policies and Use in Developing and Transitional Countries: An Analysis of Reported Policy Implementation and Medicines Use Surveys," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-16, September.
    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. Kathleen Anne Holloway & Laura Rosella & David Henry, 2016. "The Impact of WHO Essential Medicines Policies on Inappropriate Use of Antibiotics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-12, March.
    2. Biruk Wogayehu & Yilma Chisha & Be’emnetu Tekabe & Ayalew Adinew & Mulugeta Asefaw, 2019. "A cross sectional comparison of drug use indicators using WHO methodology in primary level hospitals participating in an Auditable Pharmaceutical Transactions and Services program versus non-APTS prim," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-26, October.
    3. Kathleen Anne Holloway & Verica Ivanovska & Solaiappan Manikandan & Mathaiyan Jayanthi & Anbarasan Mohan & Gilles Forte & David Henry, 2020. "Identifying the most effective essential medicines policies for quality use of medicines: A replicability study using three World Health Organisation data-sets," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-16, February.
    4. Katrina Perehudoff & Ivan Demchenko & Nikita V. Alexandrov & David Brutsaert & Angela Ackon & Carlos E. Durán & Faris El-Dahiyat & Firdaus Hafidz & Rezwan Haque & Rabia Hussain & Roderick Salenga & Fa, 2020. "Essential Medicines in Universal Health Coverage: A Scoping Review of Public Health Law Interventions and How They Are Measured in Five Middle-Income Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-30, December.
    5. S Katrina Perehudoff & Nikita V Alexandrov & Hans V Hogerzeil, 2019. "The right to health as the basis for universal health coverage: A cross-national analysis of national medicines policies of 71 countries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-15, June.
    6. Mai Duong & Rebekah J Moles & Betty Chaar & Timothy F Chen & World Hospital Pharmacy Research Consortium (WHoPReC), 2015. "Essential Medicines in a High Income Country: Essential to Whom?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-14, December.

    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:pone00:0225429. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.