Assessment of the Substandard Drugs in Developing Countries: The Impact of the Pharmaceutical Regulations on the Quality of Medicines on the Sudanese Market Importers’ Perspective

Abdeen Mustafa Omer


The strategy of price liberalization and privatization had been implemented in Sudan over the last decade, and has had a positive result on government deficit. The investment law approved recently has good statements and rules on the above strategy in particular to pharmacy regulations. Under the pressure of the new privatization policy, the government introduced radical changes in the pharmacy regulations. The 2001 Pharmacy and Poisons Act and its provisions established the Federal Pharmacy and Poison Board (FPPB). All the authorities of the implementation of Pharmacy and Poisons Act were given to this board. This article provides an overview of the impact of the pharmaceutical regulations on the quality of medicines on the Sudanese market from the perspective of the pharmacists working with drug importing companies. The information necessary to conduct the evaluation was collected from 30 pharmacists who are the owners or shareholders in medicines’ importing companies. The participants were selected randomly. 89% of respondents considered the medicines on the Sudanese market are generally of good quality. The design of the research itself may be considered inadequate with regard to selection process. However, the authors believe it provides enough evidence, and the current pharmaceutical regulations have some loopholes. The Pharmacy, Poisons, Cosmetics and Medical Devices Act-2001 and its regulation should be enforced. The overall set-up including the Act itself needs to be revised.


Counterfeits Medicines, Drug Importers, Quality of Medicines, Regulatory Authorities

Full Text:



Ministry of Health (MOH). Act 2001: Pharmacy, Poisons, Cosmetic and Medical Devices. 2001, Ministry of Health (MOH): Sudan.

Alubo SO. Death for sale: A study of drug poisoning and deaths in Nigeria. Social Science & Medicine 1994; 38(1): 97 – 103.

Andalo D. Counterfeit drugs set alarm bells ringing. Pharmaceutical Journal 2004; 273341.

Bryman A. Social Research Method. 2nd Ed., 2004, Oxford University Press.

Elfadil AA. Quality assurance and quality control in the CMSPO, 2005.

Erhun WO, Babalola OO, Erhun MO. Drug regulation and control in Nigeria: The counterfeit drugs. Journal of Health and Population in Developing Countries 2001; 4(2): 23– 34.

Gamal KM, Omer AM. A prescription for improvement: A short survey to identify reasons behind public sector pharmacists’ migration. World Health and Population 2006: 1-24

Helling-Borda M. The role and experience of the World Health Organization in assisting countries to develop and implement national drug policies. Australian Prescriber 1995; 20(1): 34–38.

Jallow M. Evaluation of national drug policy in the Gambia, with special emphasis on the essential drug programme. University of Oslo: Norway, 1991.

Lexchin J. Drug makers and drug regulators: Too close for comfort. A study of the Canadian situation. Social Science and Medicine 1990; 31(11): 1257 – 1263.

Lofgren H, Boer R. Pharmaceuticals in Australia: developments in regulation and governance. Social Science and Medicine 2004; 58: 2397 – 2407.

Ministry of Health (MOH). 25 years Pharmacy Strategy (2002-2027). Khartoum: Sudan. Unpublished Report, 2003.

National Drug Policy (NDP). Ministry of Health (MOH): Sudan, 1997.

Osibo OO. Faking and counterfeiting of drugs. West African Journal of Pharmacy 1998; 12(1): 53 – 57.

Ratanwijitrasin S, Soumerai SB, Weerasuriya K. Do national medicinal drug policies and essential drug programmes improve drug use? A review of experiences in developing countries. Social Science & Medicine 2001; 53: 831–844.

Rudolf PM, Bernstein IBG. Counterfeit Drugs. New England Journal of Medicine 2004; 350(14): 1384 1386.

Shakoor O, Taylor RB, Behrens RH. Assessment of the substandard drugs in developing countries. Tropical Medicines and International Health 1997; 2(9): 839– 845.

Sibanda FK. Regulatory excess: The role of regulatory impact assessment and the Competition Commission. In: Proceedings of the Pro-Poor Regulation and Competition Conference hosted by the Centre of Regulation and Competition (CRC), University of Manchester, UK, and the School of Public Management & Planning, University of Stellenbosch, Cape Town, 7-9 September 2004.

WHO. Counterfeit drugs: guidelines for the development of measures to combat counterfeit drug. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1991. WHO/EDM/ QSM/1990.1.

World Health Organization / Drug Action Programme (WHO/DAP). Comparative analysis of international drug policies. Report from the second workshop Geneva, June 1996.

WHO. International drug policies. Geneva: Switzerland, 2009.

Velpandian V, Elangovan S, Naansi Agnes L, Mohamed Musthafa M. Clinical Evaluation of Justicia tranquebariensis L. In the Management of Bronchial Asthma, American Journal of Phytomedicine and Clinical Therapeutics 2014; (2)9: 1103-1111.

Ravi Shankar K, Sita Ratna Kumari N, Kiranmayi GVN. In vitro Study of Antioxidant and Antimalarial Activities of New Chromeno-Pyrano-Chromene Derivative, American Journal of Phytomedicine and Clinical Therapeutics 2014; (2)9: 1169-1176.

Ramprabhu1 R, Jairam, Karthik A, Ravikanth K, Shivi Maini, Adarsh. Evaluation of Regular Teat Sanitization Control Measures for Prevention of Sub Clinical Mastitis in Cattle, American Journal of Phytomedicine and Clinical Therapeutics 2014; (2)9: 1212-1216.

Omer AM. The impact of the pharmaceutical regulations on the quality of medicines on the Sudanese market: importers’ perspective, Prime Journals of Business Administration and Management 2011; 1(9): 295-302.

Omer AM. Chapter 5: Regulatory privatisation, social welfare services and its alternatives, In: Advances in Medicines and Biology, Vol.72, Editor: Leon V. Berhardt, 2013 NOVA Science Publishers, Inc., pp. 69-86, New York, USA, 2013.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2015 Pharmaceutical and Biological Evaluations

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Creative Commons License


© Copyright 2018 - Pharmaceutical and Biological Evaluations