Publication:
Evaluation of portable devices for medicine quality screening: Lessons learnt, recommendations for implementation, and future priorities

dc.contributor.authorCeline Cailleten_US
dc.contributor.authorSerena Vickersen_US
dc.contributor.authorVayouly Vidhamalyen_US
dc.contributor.authorKem Boutsamayen_US
dc.contributor.authorPhonepasith Bouphaen_US
dc.contributor.authorStephen Zambrzyckien_US
dc.contributor.authorNantasit Luangasanatipen_US
dc.contributor.authorYoel Lubellen_US
dc.contributor.authorFacundo M. Fernandezen_US
dc.contributor.authorPaul N. Newtonen_US
dc.contributor.otherFaculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversity of Oxforden_US
dc.contributor.otherGeorgia Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahosot Hospital, Laoen_US
dc.contributor.otherNuffield Department of Medicineen_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-04T09:12:53Z
dc.date.available2022-08-04T09:12:53Z
dc.date.issued2021-09-01en_US
dc.description.abstractPortable devices able to detect substandard and falsified medicines are vital innovations for enhancing the inspection of medicines in pharmaceutical supply chains and for timely action before they reach patients. Such devices exist, but there has been little to no independent scientific evidence of their accuracy and cost-effectiveness to guide regulatory authorities in choosing appropriate devices for their settings. We tested 12 portable devices, evaluated their diagnostic performances and the resources required to use each device in a laboratory. We then assessed the utility and usability of the devices in medicine inspectors' hands in a pharmacy mimicking a real-life Lao pharmacy. We then assessed the health and economic benefits of using portable devices compared to not using them in a low- to middle-income setting. Here, we discuss the conclusions and practical implications of the multiphase study discussed in this Collection. We discuss the results, highlight the evidence gaps, and provide recommendations on the key aspects to consider in the implementation of portable devices and their main advantages and limitations.en_US
dc.identifier.citationPLoS Medicine. Vol.18, No.9 (2021)en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pmed.1003747en_US
dc.identifier.issn15491676en_US
dc.identifier.issn15491277en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85116723333en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/77864
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85116723333&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleEvaluation of portable devices for medicine quality screening: Lessons learnt, recommendations for implementation, and future prioritiesen_US
dc.typeReviewen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85116723333&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections