IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0339569.html

Perceptions and practices on substandard and falsified medicines in humans and animals in Wakiso district, Uganda: A qualitative study

Author

Listed:
  • David Musoke
  • Grace Biyinzika Lubega
  • Claire Brandish
  • Kate Russell-Hobbs
  • Natasha Hamilton
  • Jody Winter
  • Carol Esther Nabbanja
  • Filimin Niyongabo
  • Michael Obeng Brown
  • Elma Rejoice Banyen
  • Herbert Bush Aguma
  • Linda Gibson

Abstract

Background: Few studies have taken a broad perspective on substandard and falsified medicines (SFMs) in community settings in Uganda. We therefore qualitatively assessed the perceptions and practices on SFMs for humans and animals in Wakiso District, Uganda. Methods: This qualitative study employed 12 focus group discussions among community health workers and farmers, as well as 11 key informant interviews among health professionals, local leaders, veterinary and human drug shop operators, and Ministry of Health and Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries officials. Data was analysed thematically using NVivo (2020). Results: Findings are presented under four themes: definition of SFMs; identification of SFMs; drivers of SFMs; and challenges in reporting SFMs. Although participants felt that the term SFMs was too broad to define, many explained it in relation to consequences (such as side effects, disabilities, and death), and the different methods that may be employed to identify SFMs. SFMs were said to be identified through changes in appearance such as colour, texture and packaging. However, the most reported way of identifying SFMs was based on negative effects on humans and animals after use. Customer drivers of SFMs included inadequate knowledge, lack of finances, and lack of access to licensed drug shops/ pharmacies. Supplier drivers of SFMs included limited regulation and enforcement, and the business orientation of drug shops/ pharmacies. Lack of knowledge of how to report suspected cases of SFMs, lack of proof of purchase of SFMs, fear of reporting, and lack of trust in government procedures were the challenges identified to reporting SFMs. Conclusion: Several drivers of SFMs in the community were established related to individuals, sources of medicine, and regulatory frameworks. Increased awareness on SFMs, improved traceability of purchases and reporting, and better enforcement of regulations are needed to reduce the use and risks associated with SFMs to protect public health.

Suggested Citation

  • David Musoke & Grace Biyinzika Lubega & Claire Brandish & Kate Russell-Hobbs & Natasha Hamilton & Jody Winter & Carol Esther Nabbanja & Filimin Niyongabo & Michael Obeng Brown & Elma Rejoice Banyen & , 2025. "Perceptions and practices on substandard and falsified medicines in humans and animals in Wakiso district, Uganda: A qualitative study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(12), pages 1-17, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0339569
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0339569
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0339569
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0339569&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0339569?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
    ---><---

    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:pone00:0339569. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.