Prevalence estimates of substandard drugs in Mongolia using a random sample survey

To determine the prevalence of substandard drugs in urban (Ulaanbaatar) and rural (selected provinces) areas of Mongolia, samples of 9 common, therapeutically important drugs were collected from randomly selected drug outlets in Ulaanbaatar and 4 rural provinces by “mystery shoppers”. Samples were a...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Khurelbat, D., Dorj, Gereltuya, Bayarsaikhan, E., Chimedsuren, M., Sanjjav, T., Morimoto, T., Morley, M., Morley, K.
Format: Journal Article
Published: SpringerOpen 2014
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/16349
_version_ 1848749151008849920
author Khurelbat, D.
Dorj, Gereltuya
Bayarsaikhan, E.
Chimedsuren, M.
Sanjjav, T.
Morimoto, T.
Morley, M.
Morley, K.
author_facet Khurelbat, D.
Dorj, Gereltuya
Bayarsaikhan, E.
Chimedsuren, M.
Sanjjav, T.
Morimoto, T.
Morley, M.
Morley, K.
author_sort Khurelbat, D.
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description To determine the prevalence of substandard drugs in urban (Ulaanbaatar) and rural (selected provinces) areas of Mongolia, samples of 9 common, therapeutically important drugs were collected from randomly selected drug outlets in Ulaanbaatar and 4 rural provinces by “mystery shoppers”. Samples were analyzed by visual inspection, registration status, and biochemical analysis. Samples failing to meet all Pharmacopeia quality tests were consideredsubstandard.In the rural provinces, 69 out of 388 samples were substandard, giving an estimated prevalence of substandard drugs of 17.8% (95%CI:14.1-22.0). There were 85 unregistered samples, giving a prevalence estimate of unregistered drugs of 21.9%. (95% CI: 17.9-26.3). In the urban Ulaanbaatar districts, 112 out of 848 samples were substandard, giving an estimated prevalence of substandard drugs of 13.2% (95%CI: 11.0-15.7). There were 150 unregistered samples, giving a prevalence estimate of unregistered drugs of 17.7% (95%CI:15.2-20.4).In the rural provinces, 35 out of 85 (41.2%) unregistered samples were substandard; whereas 34 out of 303 (11.2%) registered samples were substandard. (p < 0.0001) In the urban districts, 18 out of 150 (12.0%) unregistered samples were substandard, whereas 94 out of 698 registered were substandard. (13.5%) (p = 0.6).The prevalence of substandard and unregistered drugs is higher in rural provinces. There is asignificant association between substandard and unregistered drugs in the provinces but not inthe urban districts. The underlying causes for substandard drugs need to be further investigated in order to help formulate strategies to improve pharmacovigilance and the drugsupply quality in Mongolia.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T07:16:22Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-16349
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T07:16:22Z
publishDate 2014
publisher SpringerOpen
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-163492017-09-13T15:03:21Z Prevalence estimates of substandard drugs in Mongolia using a random sample survey Khurelbat, D. Dorj, Gereltuya Bayarsaikhan, E. Chimedsuren, M. Sanjjav, T. Morimoto, T. Morley, M. Morley, K. Medication quality Patient safety Falsified Asia Developing countries Substandard To determine the prevalence of substandard drugs in urban (Ulaanbaatar) and rural (selected provinces) areas of Mongolia, samples of 9 common, therapeutically important drugs were collected from randomly selected drug outlets in Ulaanbaatar and 4 rural provinces by “mystery shoppers”. Samples were analyzed by visual inspection, registration status, and biochemical analysis. Samples failing to meet all Pharmacopeia quality tests were consideredsubstandard.In the rural provinces, 69 out of 388 samples were substandard, giving an estimated prevalence of substandard drugs of 17.8% (95%CI:14.1-22.0). There were 85 unregistered samples, giving a prevalence estimate of unregistered drugs of 21.9%. (95% CI: 17.9-26.3). In the urban Ulaanbaatar districts, 112 out of 848 samples were substandard, giving an estimated prevalence of substandard drugs of 13.2% (95%CI: 11.0-15.7). There were 150 unregistered samples, giving a prevalence estimate of unregistered drugs of 17.7% (95%CI:15.2-20.4).In the rural provinces, 35 out of 85 (41.2%) unregistered samples were substandard; whereas 34 out of 303 (11.2%) registered samples were substandard. (p < 0.0001) In the urban districts, 18 out of 150 (12.0%) unregistered samples were substandard, whereas 94 out of 698 registered were substandard. (13.5%) (p = 0.6).The prevalence of substandard and unregistered drugs is higher in rural provinces. There is asignificant association between substandard and unregistered drugs in the provinces but not inthe urban districts. The underlying causes for substandard drugs need to be further investigated in order to help formulate strategies to improve pharmacovigilance and the drugsupply quality in Mongolia. 2014 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/16349 10.1186/2193-1801-3-709 SpringerOpen fulltext
spellingShingle Medication quality
Patient safety
Falsified
Asia
Developing countries
Substandard
Khurelbat, D.
Dorj, Gereltuya
Bayarsaikhan, E.
Chimedsuren, M.
Sanjjav, T.
Morimoto, T.
Morley, M.
Morley, K.
Prevalence estimates of substandard drugs in Mongolia using a random sample survey
title Prevalence estimates of substandard drugs in Mongolia using a random sample survey
title_full Prevalence estimates of substandard drugs in Mongolia using a random sample survey
title_fullStr Prevalence estimates of substandard drugs in Mongolia using a random sample survey
title_full_unstemmed Prevalence estimates of substandard drugs in Mongolia using a random sample survey
title_short Prevalence estimates of substandard drugs in Mongolia using a random sample survey
title_sort prevalence estimates of substandard drugs in mongolia using a random sample survey
topic Medication quality
Patient safety
Falsified
Asia
Developing countries
Substandard
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/16349