Availability, market share and price of quality assured artemisinin-based combination therapies in private drug outlets after over a decade of Copayment mechanism in Uganda

Introduction

The World Health Organization (WHO) reported an overall increase in malaria burden globally of up to two million cases in 2020-2021 with most of the increase occurring in the WHO Africa region (1). Uganda is among the four countries including Nigeria, Democratic Republic of Congo and Mozambique that accounted for nearly half of all malaria cases globally in 2020-2021 (1). Malaria thus remains a disease of public health concern in Uganda accounting for 30-50% of all out-patient visits, and 15-20% of all hospital admissions (2). The healthcare system in Uganda like most other low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) is faced with multiple challenges including inadequate human resource and limited funding (3). The unreliable supply coupled with high costs of antimalarial agents in health facilities common in most LMICs potentially affect malaria treatment (4, 5). In Uganda, this is likely to be worsened by the high burden of malaria.

In most low-and middle-income countries (LMICs), over 60% of the population first seek treatment in the private sector (6). A study by Ocan et al., (7) reported over half of population in northern Uganda accessing antimalarial agents over the counter in private drug outlets. The sector thus plays an integral role in the fight against malaria (8). Patients seeking malaria treatment in the private sector are however faced with multiple challenges including high cost, unreliable supply, and substandard antimalarial agents (5, 9). In most malaria affected countries price remains the leading contributor to limited access to antimalarial agents (5, 10). These potentially affects access to appropriate malaria treatment which potentially predisposes patients to adverse treatment outcomes including exacerbation of the current resistance to first-line antimalarial agents.

One of the key factors influencing access to appropriate malaria treatment is pricing of antimalarial agents (5). The Affordable medicines facility for malaria (AMFm) is a financing mechanism incorporating three elements; price reductions through negotiations with manufacturers of quality-assured ACTs (QAACTs), a buyer subsidy to the participating manufacturers, and interventions to support AMFm implementation and promote appropriate antimalarial use (11). Affordable Medicines Facility-malaria (AMFm), funded by three donors (UNITAID, the UK government and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation) was renamed as the private sector co-payment mechanism and integrated into the existing Global Fund grants (12). The AMFm initiative is intended to improve availability, affordability, and access to quality assured artemisinin-based combination therapies (QAACTs) in the private sector (13). Under the AMFm, public and private importers pay manufacturers a subsidized price between $0.005 and $ 0.22 per treatment course, representing 1-20% of the manufacturer price (14). The balance is then paid to the manufacturer via the co-payment fund (14). Uganda was part of the countries where the initiative was first piloted and subsequently implemented the Copayment mechanism following the AMFm transition period in 2013 (13).

Negotiations with manufacturers under the AMFm led to reductions in manufacturer price for sales to private-for-profit buyers of up to 29-78% depending on package size, bringing prices down to around the levels paid by public purchasers (15). This helped improve availability, affordability, and access to QAACTs in the AMFm pilot countries. In Uganda the AMFm was replaced by Copayment mechanism following the end of the pilot period (13). The approved quality assured ACTs in Uganda include Artemether/lumefantrine, Artesunate/Amodiaquine, Dihydroartemisinin/piperaquine, and Artesunate/Pyronaridine (16, 17). Uganda is currently implementing 70% subsidy for all package sizes of QAACTs (13). However, the impact of the Copayment mechanism in the private sector remains unclear. Therefore, this study assessed availability, price, and market share of quality assured artemisinin-based combination therapies (QAACT) in the private drug outlets in low and high malaria transmission settings in Uganda after over a decade of implementing Copayment mechanism.

Methods

Results

Discussion

The study found at least one antimalarial agent present in all drug outlets during the day of the survey. Additionally, Artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) were the most common antimalarial agents in the drug outlets. This is unlike the findings of a previous study by O’Connell et al., (20) done in six sub-Saharan African countries that reported a low prevalence of ACTs in private sector. The implementation of Affordable medicines facility for malaria (AMFm) program could have influenced the difference in the findings of the two studies. A study by ACTwatch group et al., (13), reported an increase on availability of ACTs following implementation of the AMFm-malaria program. The finding of our study is an indicator of wide availability of Artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs), the current cornerstone for malaria treatment in private drug outlets.

The immediate post AMFm pilot period was characterized by increases in the availability of QAACTs in the private sector in Uganda and all other countries where it was implemented (13, 14). However, our study found a low prevalence of QAACTs in private drug outlets after over a decade of implementing copayment mechanism following AMFm pilot period. This is like findings of a study by O’Connell et al., (20). The low availability of QAACTs in private drug outlets highlights the challenges of implementation of copayment mechanism especially lack of supporting interventions like training of private sector healthcare personnel and behavioral change communication (13, 14).

The study did not find oral artemisinin-based monotherapies in the drug outlets. The injectable artemisinin monotherapies (Artesunate and Artemether) were however common. According to the National malaria case management guidelines, injectable artemisinin agents are indicated in the treatment of severe malaria and are to be used alongside oral ACTs. The use of oral artemisinin monotherapies in malaria treatment was reported in Southeast Asia as one of the drivers of artemisinin resistance development (21). Our findings are like those of a previous study by ACTwatch et al., (13) and O’Connell et al., (20) who reported not finding artemisinin-based monotherapies in sub-Saharan Africa. The objectives of the AMFm were to make the ACTs more available, accessible and to crowd out artemisinin monotherapies (13). The findings of our study could thus be due to the emphasis placed on the Artemisinin based combination therapies through the AMFm and Copayment mechanism in the country. In addition, the absence of artemisinin monotherapies in Uganda could be due to the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation to malaria affected countries to ban importation and manufacture of these agents.

The study found non-artemisinin antimalarial agents in the drug outlets across the country. This is like the findings of a study by O’Connell et al., (20) which reported high prevalence of non-artemisinin agents in sub-Saharan African countries. Our study found, chloroquine, quinine and Sulphadoxine/Pyrimethamine (SP) as common non-artemisinin agents in drug outlets. Presence of non-artemisinin therapies in the private drug outlets could be due to their perceived effectiveness and familiarity from previous use coupled with provider behavior and beliefs (7, 22). Sulphadoxine/Pyrimethamine (SP) is recommended for use in prophylaxis against malaria in pregnancy (23). Additionally, Quinine is a second line agent in treatment of severe malaria in the country (18). However, the use of chloroquine was discontinued in 2006 (24) due to widespread resistance. The continued presence of chloroquine in private drug outlets is an indicator of access and use by communities in management of symptoms of malaria. Recent studies in Uganda have reported persistence of P. falciparum resistance against chloroquine over two decades after discontinuation of its use in the country (25). Therefore, continued use of chloroquine by communities is likely to lead to inadequate treatment and increased risk of unwanted malaria treatment outcomes.

Dihydroartemisinin/Piperaquine (DP) and Artemether/lumefantrine (AL), the two most popular ACTs had a high median dispensing price for a full adult dose ranging from USD 1.4 – 2.4. The median price of the subsidized ACTs (‘Green leaf ACTs’) was also significantly higher than the non-subsidized agents. This is similar to the prices reported in a study by O’Connell et al., (20) done in six malaria endemic countries in sub-Saharan Africa. A previous study by Tougher et al., (14) also found no significant change in ACT prices following implementation of AMFm pilot program in Uganda. In a country where majority of the rural communities live under USD 1.0 a day, the reported prices of ACTs are potentially prohibitive. The reported high cost of ACTs potentially hinders access to appropriate and effective malaria treatment in the country. Recent studies in Uganda have reported high over-the-counter access of antimalarial agents which coupled with the high cost of ACTs could drive inappropriate use (7, 26). With the emerging artemisinin resistance, inappropriate use of ACTs is likely to exacerbate malaria parasite resistance in the country (27). The high cost of quality assured ACTs in the private sector despite government subsidy highlights the challenge of implementation of government programs especially in LMICs. There is thus need for regular monitoring of the implementation of copayment mechanism for improvement of availability and access to quality assured ACTs in the private sector.

The study had some limitations, the overt method used is likely to be affected by the pharmacists not reporting the actual practice in the pharmacy. However, the additional review of stock cards and drug dispensing logs in the pharmacies and drug shops helped collaborate the findings of the study.

Conclusion

The results of our study indicate low prevalence of QAACTs in private drug outlets after over a decade of implementation of copayment mechanism in Uganda. Prices of both QAACTs and non-QAACTs remain high in private drug outlets (pharmacies and drug shops) despite the subsidies on QAACTs. There is need for consistent implementation of Copayment supporting interventions to help create demand for QAACTs among private sector health providers and the population. The Ministry of Health needs to conduct a review of the copayment mechanism to establish barriers to its implementation in the country.

Author contribution

Conceptualization of the study (MO and SN), data curation and formal analysis (CO), methodology and investigation (MO and LN), validation (WN), Writing-original draft preparation (MO), supervision (SN). All the authors reviewed and edited the final version of the manuscript.