Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 19, 2026

Antimicrobial Synergy Testing by the Inkjet Printer-assisted Automated Checkerboard Array and the Manual Time-kill Method
Published on: April 18, 2019
Comparing the return on investment of technologies to detect substandard and falsified amoxicillin: A Kenya case
Colleen R Higgins1, Betty Kobia1, Sachiko Ozawa1,2
1Division of Practice Advancement and Clinical Education, University of North Carolina Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
Abstract:
The prevalence of substandard and falsified medicines in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is a major global public health concern. Multiple screening technologies for post-market surveillance of medicine quality have been developed but there exists no clear guidance on which technology is optimal for LMICs. This study examined the return on investment (ROI) of implementing a select number of screening technologies for post-market surveillance of amoxicillin quality in a case study of Kenya. An agent-based model, Examining Screening Technologies using Economic Evaluations for Medicines (ESTEEM), was developed to estimate the costs, benefits, and ROI of implementing screening technologies for post-market surveillance of substandard and falsified amoxicillin for treatment of pediatric pneumonia in Kenya. The model simulated sampling, testing, and removal of substandard and falsified amoxicillin from the Kenyan market using five screening technologies: (1) Global Pharma Health Fund's GPHF-Minilab, (2) high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), (3) near-infrared spectroscopy (NIR), (4) paper analytical devices / antibiotic paper analytical devices (PADs/aPADs), and (5) Raman spectroscopy. The study team analyzed the population impact of utilizing amoxicillin for the treatment of pneumonia in children under age five in Kenya. We found that the GPHF-Minilab, NIR, and PADs/aPADs were similar in their abilities to rapidly screen for and remove substandard and falsified amoxicillin from the Kenyan market resulting in a higher ROI compared to HPLC. NIR and PADs/aPADs yielded the highest ROI at $21 (90% Uncertainty Range (UR) $5-$51) each, followed by GPHF-Minilab ($16, 90%UR $4 - $38), Raman ($9, 90%UR $2 - $21), and HPLC ($3, 90%UR $0 - $7). This study highlights screening technologies that can be used to reduce costs, speed up the removal of poor-quality medicines, and consequently improve health and economic outcomes in LMICs. National medicine regulatory authorities should adopt these fast, reliable, and low-cost screening technologies to better detect substandard and falsified medicines, reserving HPLC for confirmatory tests.
More Related Videos
09:59Application of the Intelligent High-Throughput Antimicrobial Sensitivity Testing/Phage Screening System and Lar Index of Antimicrobial Resistance
Published on: July 21, 2023
06:11Author Spotlight: Advancing Rapid Detection of Respiratory Pathogens Using Microfluidic Chip
Published on: March 29, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Rapid Identification of Pathogens
Automated Microbial Diagnostics
Clinical Significance of Antibiotic Resistance