Stability of Essential Drugs in Tropical Climates: Zimbabwe - EDM Research Series No. 013
(1994; 86 pages) Voir le document au format PDF
Table des matières
Afficher le documentAbbreviations
Afficher le document1. Summary
Ouvrir ce répertoire et afficher son contenu2. Introduction
Fermer ce répertoire3. Study design and methods
Afficher le document3.1 Outline of the study
Afficher le document3.2 Sampling procedures
Afficher le document3.3 Number and type of samples obtained
Afficher le document3.4 Risk factors for poor drug quality
Afficher le document3.5 Sample storage and laboratory tests
Afficher le document3.6 Data processing and statistical analysis
Afficher le document4. Results
Ouvrir ce répertoire et afficher son contenu5. Discussion
Ouvrir ce répertoire et afficher son contenu6. Conclusions and recommendations
Afficher le documentReferences
Ouvrir ce répertoire et afficher son contenuAnnexes
 

3.4 Risk factors for poor drug quality

Table 4 describes the facility sample group in terms of "risk factors" which possibly affect quality.

64% of the facility samples were from PHC level and 36% from hospitals.

69% of the samples were from facilities in hot climate areas as defined by "discomfort level" in a zoning system used by the Surveyor-General's Office, based on combined temperature and humidity records from the Meteorological Department.

64% of the samples were from facilities which depend on slow (worst case) transport methods such as railways (or the railway's own road motor services or a combination of both). This was likely to mean repeated handling, long storage times at depots, and possible exposure to high temperatures in transit. The remaining 36% were delivered using the medical stores' own vehicles (covered trucks) or commercial transporters providing an overnight/24 hour delivery service. These methods were assumed to represent the "best case" with short transit times and minimal exposure to high temperatures.

Drug store rooms at facility level were found to be satisfactory in all cases. Windows were curtained and the rooms had ceilings. In the case of ergometrine, the use of refrigeration or room temperature storage was recorded on the sample form.

Note: the actual conditions of transportation and storage will be the subject of a separate study where temperature and humidity were monitored for a sample of distribution routes.

Table 4 - Number and percentage of samples in each risk category

Drug name

Total samples

Age>50% shelf-life

Facility type=PHC

Climate type=hot

Transport =slow

Amoxycillin 250mg caps

25 (100%)

23 (92%)

0

13 (52%)

17(68%)

Ampicillin 250mg caps

28 (100%)

1 (4%)

0

13 (46%)

19 (68%)

Acetylsalicylic acid 300mg tabs

79 (100%)

44 (56%)

56 (71%)

65 (82%)

54 (68%)

Doxycycline 100mg caps

15 (100%)

9 (60%)

0

3 (20%)

10 (67%)

Ferrous sulfate 60mg Fe tabs

76 (100%)

42 (55%)

58 (76%)

57 (75%)

52 (68%)

Phenoxymethylpenicillin 250mg tabs

59 (100%)

4 (7%)

44 (75%)

50 (85%)

41 (69%)

Tetracycline 250mg caps

66 (100%)

5 (8%)

50 (76%)

55 (83%)

46 (70%)

Retinol 25-50,000 IU tabs

51 (100%)

10 (20%)

39 (76%)

38 (75%)

33 (65%)

Epinephrine 1:1000 inj

10 (100%)

1 (10%)

4 (40%)

7 (70%)

5 (50%)

Ampicillin 500mg inj

24 (100%)

16 (67%)

0

11 (46%)

19 (79%)

Benzylpenicillin 5MU inj

41 (100%)

28 (68%)

35 (85%)

34 (83%)

30 (73%)

Ergometrine 0.5mg/ml inja

67 (100%)

40 (60%)

46 (69%)

48 (72%)

b

Procaine penicillin 300mg/ml inj

72 (100%)

2 (3%)

58 (81%)

53 (74%)

46 (64%)

TOTAL

648 (100%)

225 (35%)

380 (59%)

447 (69%)

372 (64%)

Note:

a Ten ergometrine inj samples were unrefriderated at time of sampling.

b Ergometrine inj was transported according to cold chain procedures in the majority of cases, but not all.

vers la section précédente vers la section suivante
 

Dernière mise à jour: le 3 mai 2013