Inequality Analysis of Pharmacist Distribution in Iran

Abstract

Introduction: Unequal distribution of resources has always been a concern for health systems in addressing access issues in relation to health services.It might have a devastating effect on health outcomes and in a way incur the direct and indirect costs. The purpose of this study thus is to investigate the trend of pharmacists’ distribution in Iran.Methods: In this retrospective longitudinal study, data were collected for a four-time period; 2007, 2012, 2016 and 2019,from the Statistical Center of Iran and Islamic Republic of Iran Medical Council. The sought indicator was the number of pharmacists per 10,000 population. Gini coefficient and Lorenz curve were used to measure and analyze the inequality using STATA software and ArcGIS software was used to map the pharmacists’ distribution.Results: The results showed that the number of pharmacists in 2007 was 12986 and increased by 69% (21919) in 2019, however the inequality in the distribution of pharmacists has not yet disappeared. Gini coefficient values for 2007, 2012, 2016 and 2019 were 0.26, 0.23, 0.21 and 0.19, respectively. The Gini coefficient decreased by 27% during the study period and from 2007 to 2019, pharmacy per capita increased in all provinces of Iran.Conclusion: The trend of pharmacist distribution in Iran indicates an overall decrease in the inequality level. However, the inter-provincial distribution of pharmacists is significantly unequal, demanding full attention of national and provincial authorities. The results might also inject plenty of insights into the evidence-based policy making at the ministerial level.

A national analysis of the pharmacy workforce in Indonesia

“…The uneven distribution and unavailability of the pharmacy workforce illustrate that accessibility to medicines expertise, in the face of increasing use of medicines in an ageing co-morbid population, may have repercussions for universal health coverage and sub-optimal primary healthcare support. The pattern of having a higher workforce density in the capital city is also typical of other low-and lower-middle-income countries [44][45][46]. Reasons for this urban imbalance might be family and social relationships, working and living conditions, career opportunities and financial incentives [47].…”