Introduction Adequate and sustainable funding of national medicine regulatory agencies (NMRAs) is key for assurance of quality, safety and efficacy of medical products circulating in a market. The study aimed to determine factors affecting NMRAs funding in five East African Community (EAC) countries namely: Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania (Mainland and Zanzibar) and Uganda. Methodology An exploratory, mixed method design using both qualitative and quantitative data, was employed. Data from six NMRAs was collected through a combination of semi-structured interviews, questionnaires, and checklists for the period 2011/12-2014/15 while 2010/11 data served as baseline. Interviews were conducted with heads of NMRAs and monitoring and evaluation experts of the respective agencies. NMRA's financing was assessed using six indicators namely, funding policy, financial autonomy, the total annual budget, actual funding per annum, funds received from various sources, and the NMRA expenditure. Results The average total annual budget for all the EAC countries during the study period 2011-2015 ranged from USD 824,328.67 to USD 10,724,536.50. The low budget in Zanzibar may be attributed to population and pharmaceutical market size. Uganda's attainment of 98.75% (USD 10,656,704) revenue from industry fees is a result of deliberate government policy change from 100% reliance on donor funding over a period of 10 years (1995-2015). On average, the proportion of revenue against budget per annum is 54.8% (USD 458,970.11),

Background Limited capacity to regulate medical products is associated with circulation of products which do not meet standards of quality, safety and efficacy with negative public health and economic outcomes. This study focused on assessing the effect of the East African Community (EAC) medicines regulatory harmonization initiative on the capacity of national medicines regulatory agencies, with a focus on registration and inspection systems. Methods An exploratory mixed-method design using both qualitative and quantitative data to access data from six national medicines regulatory authorities (NMRAs) and the EAC Secretariat. Data was collected using a combination of semi-structured interviews, questionnaires, and checklists for the period 2010/11–2015/16 with 2010/11 data serving as baseline. Heads of NMRAs, regulatory and monitoring and evaluation experts, and the EAC Secretariat Project Officer were enrolled in the study. A set of 14 indicators grouped into 6 categories were used to assess NMRAs performance. Results Policy and legal frameworks provide a foundation for effective regulation. Collaboration, harmonization, joint dossier reviews and inspections of manufacturing sites, reliance and cooperation are key factors for building trust and capacity among NMRAs. Five out of six of the EAC Partner States have comprehensive medicines laws with autonomous NMRAs. All the NMRAs have functional registration and good manufacturing practice inspection systems supported by regional harmonised guidelines for registration, inspection, quality management and information management systems with four NMRAs attaining ISO 9001:2015 certification. Conclusions The EAC regulatory harmonization initiative has contributed to improved capacity to regulate medical products. The indicators generated from this research can be replicated for evaluation of similar initiatives across and beyond the African continent and contribute to public health policy.

Background: For almost a decade, the East African Community has implemented the Medicines Regulatory Harmonization (EAC-MRH) programme among its member states to harmonise technical requirements and standards for medical products regulation, jointly conduct scientific review of medical product dossiers to assess safety, efficacy and quality, inspect pharmaceutical manufacturing sites and streamline decision-making processes. This initiative enables the cost-effective use of limited resources and efficient and effective delivery of regulatory services to be determined, thus instilling transparency and accountability in all stakeholders, optimising the pharmaceutical market and economic development and improving access to safe, high-quality, effective medicines in the region. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the current operating model of the EAC-MRH initiative, including challenges faced and to identify opportunities for improvement.Methods: The Process Effectiveness and Efficiency Rating (PEER) questionnaire, which was used to identify the benefits, challenges, and suggestions for improving performance of EAC-MRH initiative, was completed by assessors representing seven EAC authorities in the joint assessment procedure. Semi-structured interviews were also carried out to validate the responses.Results: This initiative has been of considerable value as it moves toward achieving its main objectives of shorter timelines for approval of medicines, information sharing among regulators and capacity building for assessments, resulting in quicker access and increased availability of medicines for patients in the region. However, the key challenges identified that have hindered effectiveness and efficiency were the lack of a centralised submission and tracking system; inadequate human resources, manufacturers’ failure to submit the exact same dossier to all countries of interest; lack of an integrated information management system; lack of information on national medical regulatory authority or EAC websites; and challenges in monitoring and tracking assessment reports.Conclusion: The use of a robust information technology system for the central tracking of EAC products is essential to address the identified challenges and improve regulatory effectiveness and efficiency. One central point for payment is needed to expedite the process and to ensure transparency and the availability of information on decision making on national and regional websites. Other key strategies for enhancement include improving the capacity of assessors, work and information sharing and a coordination mechanism for the regional joint assessment, with the eventual establishment of a regional medicine agency.

No abstract

Background: A 2021 study to determine the viewpoints among the seven member countries regarding the effectiveness (i.e., achieving the intended outcomes) and efficiency (i.e., achieving the intended outcomes in timely manner with the resources available) of the East African Community Medicine Regulatory Harmonisation (EAC-MRH) Joint Assessment Procedure recommended the conduct of a similar study among pharmaceutical company applicants. The aim of this study then was to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the current EAC-MRH operating model from the applicants’ perspective, including the challenges and opportunities for improvement.Methods: Using the Process Effectiveness and Efficiency Rating for Industry questionnaire developed by the authors, data were collected from company representatives responsible for EAC joint procedure submissions.Results: Responses from 14 study participants underlined the support of pharmaceutical companies for the EAC-MRH initiative, which has facilitated the harmonisation of registration requirements across the EAC region leading to one registration for all countries and a reduction of the workload for both applicants and assessors. In addition, it is expected that shorter timelines for approval will lead to improved access to quality-assured essential medicines in the region. Access to various markets at the same time was also noted as an important benefit to pharmaceutical companies. Noted challenges include a lack of process information, a lack of centralised submission and tracking process and a lack of mandated central registration. A key strategy proposed by participants is the establishment of a regional administrative body to centrally receive and track EAC applications and the eventual establishment of a Regional EAC Medicines Authority.Conclusion: This is the first study evaluating the performance of the EAC work-sharing initiative from the point of view of the applicants. In general, the applicants believe that the system performs efficiently and fulfils its promise. However, some participants indicated that in some countries an EAC positive recommendation does not directly result in an individual country approvals. Following the recommendations listed in this report may mitigate identified areas for improvement and facilitate the overall goal of the EAC-MRH initiative to expedite the availability of needed quality-assured medicines to patients in the region.