Ijmedph.org

A comparative review of the list of essential 
medicines of three Indian states: Findings 
Introduction: Essential medicines lists are a key instrument for improving quality 
and equitable access to health care. The National List of Essential Medicines of 
India 2011 is modeled on the WHO Essential Medicines List and Indian states 
(adopting the National List) are free to include other medicines as needed. 
Materials and Methods: National List of Essential Medicines of India 2011 contains 
a total of 287 medicines for provision at primary and secondary level of health 
facilities. The International Nonproprietary Name of these medicines was compared 
with the List of Essential Medicines (LEM) of three states, that is, Bihar, Rajasthan 
and Tamil Nadu for the inclusion patterns. Results: A large number of medicines from 
the National List of Essential Medicine (NLEM) were missing from the state LEM's, 
especially Bihar. The sections on Anticonvulsants, Diuretics, Psychotherapeutic, 
Antiallergics and Oxytocics were comprehensively included by both Rajasthan and 
Tamil Nadu. Furthermore, the analgesic and anti-infective medicines were largely 
included. However, the sections of antidotes, diagnostic agents and ophthalmological 
preparations were grossly defi cient. Similarities were found across states in their 
patterns of both inclusion and exclusion of medicines. Conclusion: The analysis 
reveals that the extent of inclusion of NLEM medicines in state LEM's is defi cient 
with variable patterns across states. This in turn has implications for drug availability, 
prescription patterns, and rational drug use. As some drugs are repeatedly there 
in NLEM but not included by states, a discussion based consultative approach for 
better coherence across the lists could lead to further optimization and utilization 
Venkatesh Narayan, 
of LEM's which would aid in improved access to medicines.
Key words: Essential medicines, inclusion of medicines, India essential medicine list
Habib Hasan1
International Clinical Epidemiology 
Network, 1Indian Institute of Public 
Health, New Delhi, India
Address for the Correspondence:
WHO defi nes Essential medicines as those that satisfy the health care needs of the majority of the 
Dr Venkatesh Narayan,
population and are selected with due regard to public health relevance, evidence on effi cacy and 
Flat No. 351, Sector A,
Pocket C, Vasant Kunj,
safety, and comparative cost-effectiveness.[1] Availability of a limited list of carefully selected essential 
New Delhi - 110 070, India.
medicines within the context of functioning health systems is among the key instruments to improve 
quality and equitable access to health care.[2] WHO published the fi rst WHO Model list of essential 
medicines (EML) in 1977 thereby providing a template which could help countries prepare their own lists[3] as also emulated by the 17th WHO model EML 2011.[4] The Indian National List of Essential 
Access this article online
Medicine (NLEM) preface states that it is modeled on the WHO EML. India's fi rst NLEM was prepared and released in 1996 which got revised in 2003 and the current 2011 version is its 3rd revision.[5]
Website: www.ijmedph.org
Within the recent debates over Universal Health Coverage in India, the issue of access to medicines has 
Quick response code:
received signifi cant attention.[6] State schemes of free access to medicines as demonstrated by Rajasthan[7] and Tamil Nadu[8] have paved the path for universal access to medicines. Several Indian states have developed their state LEM's. Often, the state-level technical advisory committees study the WHO list, NLEM and also the disease pattern prevalent in the state to derive state LEM.[9] States adopting the National List are free to include other medicines as considered adequate to treat additional diseases of local importance. While comparative analysis of LEM's has been carried out by few earlier studies, often, the focus is on specifi c sections[10,11] (such as Reproductive Health, Maternal and Child health) or an overall 
International Journal of Medicine and Public Health Jan-Mar 2015 Vol 5 Issue 1
Narayan, et al.: Essential medicine list review of three Indian states
comparison of LEM's of countries against the WHO lists.[12] Health 
criterion for noninclusion was the absence of NLEM medicines 
being a state subject in India, adequate focus needs to be devoted to the 
INN in the state LEM. Medicines are additionally characterized 
state LEM's for improving the drug availability at health institutions. 
by their strength, dosage form (e.g., syrup, cream, injection) and 
As Government of India takes hesitant steps toward universal access 
fi xed dose combinations (FDC's). However, the alphabetical list 
to medicines by asking states to review and adopt NLEM as per state 
comprising of all the 348 NLEM medicines has listed only the INN 
requirements,[6] this review attempts to aid the process. Since earlier 
of the medicines. Thus, for the purpose of comparison, listing of 
studies have not specifi cally addressed the state LEM's, this study 
the INN in the state list was considered as inclusion irrespective 
hopes to contribute to the knowledge in this arena.
of the strength or dosage forms. Listing of the INN, even within FDC was considered as the inclusion in the state LEM. For example, 
MATERIALS AND METHODS
ferrous sulfate combination with folic acid was taken as inclusion of both of these chemical entities. The drugs under National Health 
The study aims to compare the inclusion of the medicines listed in the 
Programs (e.g., Tuberculosis, Malaria, HIV) are often supplied 
NLEM across three states. The methods were adapted from earlier 
through separate programs under central support and thus were 
studies[10,11] on the subject and the methodology was suitably modifi ed 
considered to be included for state lists. Thus, the noninclusions 
to compare India's LEM with state LEM's. The state selection was 
derived from this analysis are conservative estimates, allowing for 
carried out purposively. Rajasthan has recently launched a recent free 
the above considerations, barring which the extent of noninclusions 
medicines scheme[7] and was thus selected to see if their LEM offered 
would be even larger.
an adequate inclusion of medicines. The state of Tamil Nadu is well known for its successful health initiatives including its Tamil Nadu 
Medical Services Corporation (TNMSC) model[8] and was thus included. To also review a state with comparatively poorer health indicators 
Comparison of Bihar list of Essential Medicines 
and performance,[13] Bihar LEM was chosen to assess its inclusion. 
2009 with National list of Essential Medicine
Rajasthan Medical Services Corporation maintains a publically available 
The Bihar LEM 2009 lists the drugs alphabetically for each institution 
collection of selected essential medicines lists at http://www.rmsc.nic.
both for outdoor and indoor. The Outdoor list for District Hospital 
in/Drug_Procurement.html which contained lists from four states 
that corresponds with secondary level of health facility comprises of 
(Rajasthan,[14] MP, Bihar,[15] TN[16]) at the time this study was conducted. 
total 41 medicines that also includes Plaster of Paris. It also includes 
For this study, the essential medicines lists for the requisite states were 
four FDC's (e.g., Dicyclomine with Paracetamol). It comprises of 
then selected, resulting in three unique state lists for analysis. These were 
certain ambiguities such as simply writing "cough syrup/sedative" 
then compared from NLEM available at drug regulatory authority of 
without specifying the actual contents and listing of the medicine 
India, the Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (http://www.
Rabeprazole as alternative to Ranitidine. The Indoor list comprises 
cdsco.nic.in). The lists were downloaded and reviewed by comparing 
a total of 193 medicines that also includes items such as dressing 
them with each other. Each LEM was evaluated for concordance with 
and sutures. Typological errors such as atropine being written twice 
the medicines listed in the NLEM by the lead authors. Any discrepancies 
and spelling mistakes exist in the list. Furthermore, antibiotics such 
were adjudicated by the third author.
as Amoxiclav and Vancomycin which have been listed by NLEM at tertiary level are listed at District Hospital. Against the 287 medicines 
National List of Essential Medicine 2011 has categorized medicines 
listed in NLEM for primary and secondary level, a total of 182 
according to therapeutic area. Thus certain medicines appear in >1 
medicines were found to be present in the Bihar LEM with the rest 
category. The list comprises a total of 348 medicines (excluding 
105 medicines not being included [Table 1].
repetitions), which also includes all the medicines being provided under various National Health Programs. From the total of 348 
Comparison of Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu list 
medicines in NLEM, 181 medicines have been categorized for 
of Essential Medicines (2012) with National list 
health institutions at all levels (P-primary, S-secondary, T-tertiary) 
of Essential Medicine
whereas 106 medicines have been listed for institutions at secondary and tertiary (S, T) levels. The remaining 61 drugs are categorized 
The Rajasthan LEM listed a total of 477 medicines and also the 
only for tertiary level health institutions and more than half of these 
category (Primary, Secondary, Tertiary) of health institution for its 
comprise of anticancer drugs. This analysis being more focused on drug inclusions and access at primary and secondary level, the tertiary 
Table 1: Comparison of Bihar, Rajasthan 
category and its 61 medicines were excluded from the comparative 
and Tamil Nadu LEM with NLEM
analysis. Thus, from these 348 medicines listed in NLEM 2011, a 
Rajasthan Tamil Nadu 
medicines list comprising a total of 287 (181 P, S, T + 106 S, T) 
Included medicines (out 
medicines up to secondary level health institutions was derived.
of 287 in NLEM)Nonincluded medicines 
The comparison was carried out on the basis of the International 
(out of 287 in NLEM)
Nonproprietary Name (INN) of these 287 medicines and the 
NLEM = National list of essential medicine, LEM = List of essential medicine
International Journal of Medicine and Public Health Jan-Mar 2015 Vol 5 Issue 1
Narayan, et al.: Essential medicine list review of three Indian states
availability. The Tamil Nadu LEM listed a total of 260 medicines 
of which both Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu had included two each. 
with their strengths, but without the category of health institutions. 
While the NLEM has listed Diclofenac as medicine only for 
As evident from Table 1, of the 287 medicines listed in NLEM up 
tertiary level health institutions, Rajasthan LEM includes FDC's 
to secondary level, 236 (82.2%) have been included by the Rajasthan 
of Diclofenac and Ibuprofen with Paracetamol even at Primary 
LEM as against 207 (72.7%) in Tamil Nadu LEM. Thus, as compared 
Health Centers. Section 6 of NLEM comprises of a total of 63 
to the NLEM, 51 and 78 drugs are not included by Rajasthan and 
Antiinfective Medicines. While Rajasthan had included 58 of them, 
Tamil Nadu respectively.
55 anti-infectives had also been listed by Tamil Nadu.
Utilizing the availability of updated 2012 therapeutic area wise 
While assessing the therapeutic categories which had the most 
LEM's of both states, comparisons across sections were carried 
number of excluded medicines [Figure 2], while the NLEM consisted 
out to look further into these inclusions. The section-wise 
of 13 antidotes and other substances used in poisonings, only six 
detailed analysis for the fi ve most included sections [Figure 1] 
and four of these had been included by Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu 
revealed identical patterns for both states. For Section 5 of 
respectively. The most defi cient section was that of diagnostic agents 
Anticonvulsants/Antiepileptics, Section 16 of Diuretics, and 
comprising a total of 11 ophthalmic and radiocontrast agents of 
Section 24 of Psychotherapeutic Medicines comprising of 
which while Rajasthan had included fi ve medicines, Tamil Nadu 
six, four and eight medicines respectively, all drugs listed in 
included only one. Similarly, another defi cient category was section 
NLEM were also included in the state LEM's. For Section 3 of 
21 of NLEM comprising of 15 Ophthalmological Preparations of 
Antiallergics and Medicines used in Anaphylaxis and Section 22 
which Tamil Nadu had included six preparations whereas Rajasthan 
of Oxytocics and Antioxytocics, which comprised of nine and 
had most (11) of them.
fi ve medicines respectively, only Dexchlorpheniramine Maleate and Terbutaline were missing in corresponding therapeutic 
Similarities across Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu list 
category of both states.
of Essential Medicine's
As states are showing similar and related patterns of inclusion 
Section 2 of NLEM has two subsections. The Analgesics and 
and noninclusion, Table 3 was derived comprising of the fi ve 
Antipyretics (nonsteroidal antiinfl ammatory drugs, Opioids) had 
most included sections by Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu along with 
total six medicines of which while Rajasthan had all, Tramadol had 
the cardiac, gastrointestinal and respiratory medicines w.r.t. the 
not been included by Tamil Nadu [Table 2]. The total medicines for Gout and Rheumatoid Disorders listed in NLEM were seven, 
Figure 1: Most included sections from National List of Essential 
Figure 2: Most nonincluded sections from National List of Essential 
Medicine in List of Essential Medicines of Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu
Medicine in List of Essential Medicines of Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu
Table 2: Analgesics and antiinfectives
Therapeutic category
LEM Tamil Nonincluded medicines
Section: 2 — Analgesics and antipyretics (NSAID's, opioids)
Medicines for gout and rheumatoid disorders
Allopurinol, colchicine, sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine phosphate, lefl unomide
Section: 6 — Anti-infective medicines (also includes the 
Piperazine, praziquantel, sulphadiazine, 
medicines under National Health Programmes for leprosy, 
nystatin, diloxanide furoate
tuberculosis, HIV, KalaAzar and Malaria)Total
NLEM = National list of essential medicine, LEM = List of essential medicine, NSAID's = Nonsteroidal anti-infl ammatory drugs
International Journal of Medicine and Public Health Jan-Mar 2015 Vol 5 Issue 1
Narayan, et al.: Essential medicine list review of three Indian states
Table 3: Similarities across Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu LEM's
Therapeutic category
LEM Tamil Nonincluded medicines (only Tamil Nadu*)
Section: 7 — Antimigraine medicines
Dihydro ergotamine
Section: 9 — Antiparkinsonism medicines
Section: 10 — Medicines affecting blood
Iron dextran, protamine sulphate, warfarin
Section: 15 — Disinfectants (4) and antiseptics (8)
Acrifl avin + glycerin, chlorhexidine*, potassium permanganate
Section: 20 — Muscle relaxants and cholinesterase 
inhibitorsSection: 12 — Cardiac medicines
Metoprolol, adenosine, losartan*
Section: 17 — Gastrointestinal medicines
Famotidine*, ondansetron*, 5-ASA, hyoscine*, ispaghula
Section: 25 — Medicines acting on the respiratory 
Beclomethasone dipropionate*, ipratropium*, 
iextromethorphan*, codeine phosphate
NLEM = National list of essential medicine, LEM = List of essential medicine
NLEM. The nonincluded medicines were similar across both 
onwards by Rajasthan. While FDC's are to be avoided in LEM's, 
states and comprised of medicines such as Dihydro ergotamine, 
their inclusion probably refl ects patient demand and also doctor's 
Bromocriptine, Iron dextran and Warfarin.
preference for these analgesics.
Also, Section 12 of NLEM that listed a total of 24 Cardiac medicines 
About the antiinfectives, interestingly [Table 2] most from NLEM are 
of which both Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu had not included 
present in LEM's of both Rajasthan (58 of 63) and Tamil Nadu (55 
Metoprolol and adenosine. Section 17 of gastrointestinal medicines 
of 63). LEM's are a necessary step for controlling antibiotic misuse 
had total of 15 medicines in NLEM. Rajasthan had included most 
and thus preventing drug resistance.[18] However, an earlier study 
of them (13 out of 15) and ten drugs were included by Tamil Nadu. 
in Delhi shows that though certain higher antibiotics are provided 
However, section 25 for Medicines acting on the respiratory tract 
only for restricted usage, they get prescribed frequently probably 
provides a different pattern. While the NLEM has six medicines 
due to doctor's preference of or the unavailability of alternative 
of which fi ve are included by Rajasthan, only two have been listed 
antibiotics.[19] Studies have pointed out the nonjudicious selection 
by Tamil Nadu.
due to lack of knowledge, time or the need to fi nish the near expiry drugs.[13,20] It has been demonstrated that in addition to fi nancial 
considerations, perceived demand and expectation from the patients has also promoted antibiotic overuse.[20]
The results above point out specifi c issues, the most remarkable being the limited overall number of medicines included in state 
LEM's as compared to NLEM. Noninclusion of 105 drugs in Bihar 
The possible reasons for noninclusion could be multi-fold as it is 
LEM shows incorporation of the limited number of drugs when 
possible that certain drugs in NLEM may be expensive and thus 
compared against NLEM and also the LEM of Rajasthan and Tamil 
not included. Certain drugs are consistently missing across states 
Nadu pointing out its relative inadequacy [Table 1]. In contrast 
refl ecting that they are either unnecessarily included in NLEM, that 
to this, the states of Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu has included 236 
is, inclusion could have been avoided or the prevailing disease and 
(82.2%) and 207 (72.7%) medicines in their respective state LEM's. 
prescription patterns in the state does not require these drugs. This is 
The fi nding corroborates with the success of the free medicines 
seen [Table 2] for the medicines for Gout and Rheumatoid Disorders 
scheme and TNMSC model in the states of Rajasthan[7] and Tamil 
(total seven), of which both Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu included two, 
Nadu[8] respectively. Figure 1 also shows their comprehensive 
that is, majority were not considered as fi t for inclusion by the states.
inclusion patterns as evident from the comparison of the most included sections.
Some exclusions are explained on pharmacological basis. The noninclusion of the antiallergic Dexchlorpheniramine Maleate 
Nonsteroidal antiinfl ammatory drugs 
by both Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu can be explained for by the 
simultaneous presence of Chlorpheniramine Maleate as also pointed 
The section on [Table 2] Analgesics and Antipyretics having six 
out by Manikandan and Gitanjali.[21] Also, drugs with limited usage 
drugs in NLEM are comprehensively included by Rajasthan (all six) 
like ether[21] would have been intentionally excluded by states. These 
while Tamil Nadu has excluded only Tramadol. This is explained by 
explanations are also supported by a study done by Delhi Society 
earlier studies which show that analgesics are consistently among 
for Promotion of Rational Use of Drugs (DSPRUD) which showed 
the most commonly prescribed drugs.[13,17] Also, though the NLEM 
that from 16 states, 14 states used criteria such as safety, effi cacy 
includes Diclofenac only at tertiary level, the FDC's of Diclofenac 
and cost while selecting the medicines for LEM.[9] Also, as the 
and Ibuprofen with Paracetamol are included from primary level 
LEM's get updated at a gap of few years, the changes in NLEM 
International Journal of Medicine and Public Health Jan-Mar 2015 Vol 5 Issue 1
Narayan, et al.: Essential medicine list review of three Indian states
may refl ect in state LEM after a certain period based on evaluation 
such errors are absolutely undesirable as also pointed out earlier 
by the state committee.
for NLEM[21,24] which also includes spelling mistakes and incorrect statistics. Also, in DSPRUD study, only seven states mentioned 
Since states frequently follow the pattern of WHO EML while 
consulting the NLEM while preparing the state LEM.[9] Rather, 
preparing their own LEM,[9] it can also explain some exclusions by 
in some states the Health Department was not even aware of the 
states. For the specifi c categories of radio contrast and ophthalmic 
NLEM. This refl ects a lack of utilization and awareness coupled 
preparations, earlier reviews have expressed dissatisfaction over 
with limited advocacy and dissemination of NLEM at that time.
the NLEM including six ophthalmic antiinfectives and eight radio contrast media whereas the WHO lists only three medicines against 
each of these categories.[21,22] While this probably also refl ects the growing dependence on diagnostics, utilization of items such as 
Mistakes in LEM in turn have multiple consequences. It infl uences the 
diagnostic reagents is often constrained by absence of the requisite 
prescription patterns, treatment guidelines, national health programs, 
equipment's or personnel at the health institutions.[23] Also, there 
rational use of medicines and has far reaching consequences in 
could be local procurement for certain items and higher drugs, 
addition to the economic and logistic implications. LEM being a 
especially at specifi c specialty centers or blood banks but even then, 
tool that often gets utilized for procurement of medicines and the 
they should be listed in the state LEM.
medicines in the list become a standard,[25] this at times infl uences the manufacturing of pharmaceutical companies due to assured demand. 
Similarities across states
In several states, the LEM's are prepared based on NLEM[9] thereby 
Similarities across states in patterns of inclusion and exclusion are 
incorporating and further propagating its mistakes. These issues 
seen for several categories [Table 3]. This therapeutic category wise 
with LEM's often don't get rectifi ed probably because the LEM's 
analysis also points out possible reasons for noninclusion of certain 
are not being utilized or implemented for their mandated purpose. 
medicines. As depicted in Table 3, the fi ve sections of maximum 
The lack of reliable data and evidence for disease prescription and 
drug inclusions by both Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu have related 
utilization patterns might be responsible for nonrequisite medicines 
patterns of exclusion. It is noteworthy that provision of drugs 
to enter the LEM's, either from unrealistic WHO standards[24] or 
such as Warfarin (not included by both states) and heparin, which 
other vested interests including industry infl uence.
need intensive monitoring may not be feasible at ill equipped health 
The study fi ndings are constrained by its methodological limitations. 
institutions. For Gastrointestinal medicines, the excluded drugs 
Essential drug selection is a state-specifi c process with decisions 
include medicines such as Famotidine and Ondansetron. An earlier 
made upon consideration of several factors including budgetary 
review has questioned the inclusion of Famotidine in NLEM when 
allocations, disease prevalence, drug prescription and utilization 
Omeprazole and Ranitidine are already on the list.[21] The inclusion 
patterns and population morbidity profi le. Though the study does 
of additional medicines of same class without any major advantages 
propose these as the probable reasons behind exclusion of certain 
in effi cacy and safety clearly violates the selection principles of 
drugs, it doesn't carry out an state specifi c analysis of these factors 
LEM. The similarity across state LEM's has also been discussed in 
and thus provides a limited understanding of the actual reasons 
a DSPRUD study where several states mentioned consulting LEM's 
behind these decisions. This however would require a further 
of other states while preparing their own LEM.[9] They observed 
in-depth study comprising of analysis of state specifi c processes 
that in many state LEM's, the drugs included were similar with a 
including fi eld visits and interviews with key people which lies 
minor difference in certain groups of drugs.
outside the scope of this particular study and could be taken up as 
Other issues
a separate study altogether.
Though the therapeutic category wise analysis couldn't be carried 
Earlier studies have shown the differential extents of adoption of 
out for Bihar, its LEM presents with several issues for consideration. 
WHO list across countries.[10-12] This study takes the analysis to 
The inclusion of irrational FDC's such as a combination of 
the state level adding to the previous studies on NLEM[9,21] and 
Dicyclomine with Paracetamol is entirely in violation of principles 
thereby contributing to the understanding on adoption of National 
of LEM. The listing of nonspecifi c medicines such as simply writing 
list across the states. With the increased emphasis on utilizing the 
"cough syrup/sedative" without specifying the actual contents and 
NLEM for state LEM's,[6] these fi ndings assume greater importance. 
providing the nonessential medicine Rabeprazole as an alternative 
Though the study could provide conservative estimates only due to 
to the essential drug Ranitidine defeats the whole purpose of LEM 
the methodological considerations, it still provides valuable insights 
preparation. Another important aspect is of tertiary level antibiotics 
into the inclusion patterns of which the underlying rationale could 
such as Amoxiclav and Vancomycin being listed at secondary level 
be explored by further studies into the issue.
health institutions as such discrepancy has implications for drug resistance.[18] These inconsistencies are augmented by typological 
errors of repetitions (atropine listed twice) and simultaneous inclusion of surgical items such as dressing, Plaster of Paris and 
This analysis reveals that the extent of inclusion of NLEM medicines 
sutures. It needs reemphasis that these being reference documents, 
in state lists is variable that infl uences the resultant processes towards 
International Journal of Medicine and Public Health Jan-Mar 2015 Vol 5 Issue 1
Narayan, et al.: Essential medicine list review of three Indian states
access to medicines. Such NLEM comparisons with state LEM could 
11. Hill S, Yang A, Bero L. Priority medicines for maternal and child health: A 
be utilized to improve the comprehensiveness of State LEM's and 
global survey of national essential medicines lists. PLoS One 2012;7:e38055.
12. Laing R, Waning B, Gray A, Ford N, ‘t Hoen E. 25 years of the WHO 
vice versa which shall serve as an important step in optimizing the 
essential medicines lists: Progress and challenges. Lancet 2003;361: 
utilization of LEM's. With some drugs being repeatedly there in 
NLEM but not included by states, a discussion based consultative 
13. Selvaraj S, Chokshi M, Hasan H, Kumar P. Improving Governance and 
approach for better coherence across the lists could yield better 
Accountability in India's Medicine Supply System. Draft Report Submitted to Results for Development Institute. New Delhi: Public Health Foundation 
outcomes. Also, while the analysis presents us with several inclusion 
of India; 2010.
and noninclusion patterns of certain sections and medicines, future 
14. Rajasthan Essential Medicine List; 2012. Available from: http://www.rmsc.
research needs to explore the rationale underlying these patterns.
nic.in/pdf/EDL%20Raj-2012.pdf. [Last accessed on 2013 Mar 10].
15. Bihar Essential Medicine List; 2009. Available from: http://www.rmsc.nic.
in/pdf/ELD-Bihar.pdf. [Last accessed on 2013 Mar 10].
16. Tamil Nadu Essential Medicine List; 2012. Available from: http://www.
rmsc.nic.in/pdf/EDL-Tamilnadu.pdf. [Last accessed on 2013 Mar 10].
World Health Organization. The Selection of Essential Medicines. WHO 
17. Bapna JS, Tekur U, Gitanjali B, Shashindran CH, Pradhan SC, 
Policy Perspectives on Medicines. Geneva: World Health Organization; 
Thulasimani M, et al. Drug utilization at primary health care level in 
southern India. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1992;43:413-5.
World Health Organization. WHO Policy Perspectives on Medicines — 
18. Ganguly NK, Arora NK, Chandy SJ, Fairoze MN, Gill JP, Gupta U, et al. 
Equitable Access to Essential Medicines: A Framework for Collective 
Rationalizing antibiotic use to limit antibiotic resistance in India. Indian J 
Action. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2004.
Med Res 2011;134:281-94.
World Health Organization. Medicines Use in Primary Care in Developing 
19. Kotwani A, Holloway K. Trends in antibiotic use among outpatients in New 
and Transitional Countries: Fact Book Summarizing Results from Studies 
Delhi, India. BMC Infect Dis 2011;11:99.
Reported Between 1990 and 2006. Geneva: World Health Organization; 
20. Kotwani A, Wattal C, Katewa S, Joshi PC, Holloway K. Factors infl uencing 
2009. Available from: http://www.who.int/medicines/publications/primary_
primary care physicians to prescribe antibiotics in Delhi India. Fam Pract 
care_8April09.pdf. [Last accessed on 2013 Oct 20].
WHO Model List of Essential Medicines. Available from: http://www.who.
21. Manikandan S, Gitanjali B. National list of essential medicines of India: 
int/medicines/publications/essentialmedicines/en/index.html. [Last cited 
The way forward. J Postgrad Med 2012;58:68-72.
on 2013 Oct 20; Last accessed on 2011 Mar 17].
22. Prakash VB. A critical look at the ophthalmological preparations in 
National List of Essential Medicines of India, 2011. Available from: http://
the national list of essential medicines of India 2011. J Postgrad Med 
www.cdsco.nic.in/. [Last accessed on 2013 Oct 20].
Bhaumik S, Biswas T. Free medicine for all in India. CMAJ 2012;184: 
23. Gill K. A Primary Evaluation of Service Delivery Under the National Rural 
Health Mission (NRHM): Findings from a study in Andhra Pradesh, Uttar 
Lodha SL. Free medicines and free diagnosis: A step towards social 
Pradesh, Bihar and Rajasthan. Delhi: Planning Commission of India, 
security measures by Rajasthan State in India. Public Policy Adm Res 
Government of India; 2009.
24. Gitanjali B. The national essential medicines list of India: Time to revise 
Revikumar KG, Veena R, Lekshmi S, Manna PK, Mohanta GP. Tamil 
and purge the mistakes. J Pharmacol Pharmacother 2010;1:73-4.
Nadu Medical Services Corporation — A critical study on its functioning 
25. Chirac P. Translating the essential drugs concept into the context of the 
during the period 1995-2012. Int J Pharma Chem Sci 2013;2:1691-705.
year 2000. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 2003;97:10-2.
Report on Analysis and Comparison of Essential Medicines Lists in Public Sector in Different States of India. Delhi: Delhi Society for Promotion of Rational Use of Drugs.
How to cite this article: Narayan V, Chokshi M, Hasan H. A 
10. PATH, The World Health Organization, and the United Nations Population 
comparative review of the list of essential medicines of three 
Fund. Essential Medicines for Reproductive Health: Guiding Principles 
Indian states: Findings and implications. Int J Med Public Health 
for Their Inclusion on National Medicines Lists. Seattle: PATH; 2006. 
Source of Support: Nil, Confl ict of Interest: None declared.
general/a91388/en/. [Last accessed on 2013 Mar 10].
International Journal of Medicine and Public Health Jan-Mar 2015 Vol 5 Issue 1
Source: http://www.ijmedph.org/sites/default/files/IntJMedPublicHealth_2015_5_1_71_151266.pdf
   The bioMérieux solution Did you know? VITEK2 has been challenged with ESBL in  http://www.lahey.org/studiesSite of Lahey Clinic, where tables are updated for several studies.The broader scope has been B-lactamases with amino-acid sequences published by Livermore et al.
  
   Lasers Med SciDOI 10.1007/s10103-008-0545-3 Results of fractional ablative facial skin resurfacingwith the erbium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser 1 weekand 2 months after one single treatment in 30 patients Mario A. Trelles & Serge Mordon & Mariano Velez &Fernando Urdiales & Jean Luc Levy Received: 13 December 2007 / Accepted: 17 January 2008 # Springer-Verlag London Limited 2008