Managing pharmaceutical shortages during the COVID pandemic: An exploratory analysis of European collective and national government responses.

The journal of medicine access Pub Date : 2022-09-17 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1177/27550834221123425
Matthias Beck, Joan Buckley
{"title":"Managing pharmaceutical shortages during the COVID pandemic: An exploratory analysis of European collective and national government responses.","authors":"Matthias Beck,&nbsp;Joan Buckley","doi":"10.1177/27550834221123425","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Prior to the outbreak of the COVID pandemic, pharmaceutical shortages were already recognised as a major policy problem by most, if not all, European governments; and virtually all European national governments today publicise official shortage lists. Policy making in the area has been centred on the national government level, which meant that the understanding, definition, and response to shortages has remained highly heterogeneous. When the advent of the COVID pandemic exacerbated shortages, this situation continued against a background of a weak collective European response. As part of their responses to COVID-shortages, the medicines regulators of European countries expanded the range of products pharmacies could manufacture, process and distribute as well as their procedural authority in issuing, handling and processing prescriptions. While these measures were fairly common across Europe and alleviated some bottlenecks or improved medicine access for some patient groups, other responses were highly individualistic and included export bans of certain medications as well as efforts to draw on veterinary supplies. Our own data analysis of officially recorded shortage data during the first COVID wave (to October 2020) indicates that countries that had prepared for these types of crisis and maintained an active policy stance (e.g. Germany and Norway) were more likely to encounter fewer shortages than others. We also note that there is no direct correlation between officially recorded numbers of shortages and the ways in which national governments responded to these - which indicates that cultural expectations also might have been a significant policy driver.</p>","PeriodicalId":75087,"journal":{"name":"The journal of medicine access","volume":" ","pages":"27550834221123425"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/4c/61/10.1177_27550834221123425.PMC9484042.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of medicine access","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/27550834221123425","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Prior to the outbreak of the COVID pandemic, pharmaceutical shortages were already recognised as a major policy problem by most, if not all, European governments; and virtually all European national governments today publicise official shortage lists. Policy making in the area has been centred on the national government level, which meant that the understanding, definition, and response to shortages has remained highly heterogeneous. When the advent of the COVID pandemic exacerbated shortages, this situation continued against a background of a weak collective European response. As part of their responses to COVID-shortages, the medicines regulators of European countries expanded the range of products pharmacies could manufacture, process and distribute as well as their procedural authority in issuing, handling and processing prescriptions. While these measures were fairly common across Europe and alleviated some bottlenecks or improved medicine access for some patient groups, other responses were highly individualistic and included export bans of certain medications as well as efforts to draw on veterinary supplies. Our own data analysis of officially recorded shortage data during the first COVID wave (to October 2020) indicates that countries that had prepared for these types of crisis and maintained an active policy stance (e.g. Germany and Norway) were more likely to encounter fewer shortages than others. We also note that there is no direct correlation between officially recorded numbers of shortages and the ways in which national governments responded to these - which indicates that cultural expectations also might have been a significant policy driver.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在COVID大流行期间管理药品短缺:对欧洲集体和国家政府应对措施的探索性分析。
在COVID大流行爆发之前,药品短缺已经被大多数(如果不是全部)欧洲政府视为一个主要的政策问题;如今,几乎所有的欧洲国家政府都公布了官方的短缺名单。该领域的政策制定一直集中在国家政府一级,这意味着对短缺的理解、定义和反应仍然高度不同。当COVID大流行的到来加剧短缺时,这种情况在欧洲集体应对不力的背景下继续存在。作为应对covid - 19短缺的一部分,欧洲国家的药品监管机构扩大了药店可以生产、加工和分销的产品范围,以及他们在签发、处理和加工处方方面的程序权限。虽然这些措施在整个欧洲相当普遍,缓解了一些瓶颈或改善了某些患者群体获得药品的机会,但其他应对措施是高度个人化的,包括禁止某些药物的出口以及利用兽医用品的努力。我们自己对第一波COVID浪潮(至2020年10月)期间官方记录的短缺数据进行的数据分析表明,为这类危机做好准备并保持积极政策立场的国家(如德国和挪威)比其他国家更有可能遇到更少的短缺。我们还注意到,官方记录的短缺数量与各国政府应对这些短缺的方式之间没有直接关联,这表明文化期望也可能是一个重要的政策驱动因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Stokes-Adams syndrome, a rarely reported disease. Multifocal brown tumors: A case report and literature review. Aligning our actions with our words: A systematic review of gender and racial diversity in surgical subspecialties. Out-of-pocket healthcare expenditure in emerging economies: Evidence from panel data analysis. Facilitators and barriers in acceptance of telemedicine among healthcare providers in Pakistan: A cross-sectional survey.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1