Background The World Health Organization recommends each country develop a national essential medicines list (NEML), prioritising a core medicines set aligned with national health needs. Policy in Ireland partly focusses on prescribing costs and quality, which creates opportunities for NEML development. We aimed to explore interest-holders’ perspectives on an Irish NEML.

Methods We applied a descriptive qualitative methodology. Using purposive and snowball sampling, we recruited interest-holders from Irish bodies/groups with roles in shaping Ireland’s medicines policy/use with potential for involvement in a NEML. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and analysis involved Braun and Clarke’s six-stage approach to thematic analysis.

Results Thirteen participants were interviewed and three themes were generated: 1) the NEML’s purpose, 2) NEML barriers and facilitators and 3) development and implementation processes.

For participants, an NEML’s purpose is meeting the population’s priority needs. Participants also outlined roles in ensuring adequate supplies and as a national formulary. Views differed on whether an NEML should involve reduced costs to patients for access. Participants proposed that the national government health department, the state body who run the health service (HSE), and/or the medicines regulator (HPRA) should be responsible for an NEML.

Conclusions Participants perceived an NEML in Ireland as beneficial and aligning with the WHO’s vision: medicines that effectively and safely treat the priority healthcare needs of the population. Future work should explore the patients’ and the public’s perspectives on an NEML. Other countries’ NEMLs offer exemplars to inform Ireland’s approach.

What is already known about the topic?According to The World Health Organization, "each country has the direct responsibility of evaluating and adopting a list of essential drugs, according to its own [health] policy." These national essential medicines lists (NEMLs) can be used to standardising medications used across healthcare institutions. This can have benefits for procurement costs, patient safety and preventing shortages.

What does this study add to the literature?We interviewed 13 medicines policy interest-holders about an Irish NEML. Participants envisioned an NEML as meeting the population’s priority needs. They also outlined roles for an NEML in ensuring supplies and as a national formulary. Barriers (e.g. achieving consensus) and facilitators (e.g. buy-in) to developing and implementing an NEML were outlined. Participants said transparent development processes, the use of financial incentives and a communications strategy, could help overcome barriers. Participants proposed that the national government health department, the state body who run the health service (HSE), and/or the medicines regulator (HPRA) should be responsible for an NEML.

What are the policy implications?An NEML could fit into Ireland’s ongoing health reform policy: Sláintecare. Participants’ suggested strategies for overcome NEML barriers are backed-up by findings in other high-income countries (e.g. Sweden and Canada) where transparency, financial incentives and a communications strategy contributed to NEML success.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

This research was funded by the Health Research Board in Ireland (HRB) through an Investigator Led Projects grant (grant number ILP-HSR-2019-006). JL, MP, and LTM were supported by this grant.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI) Human Research Ethics Committee (REC202003004)

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

Due to the potential for participants to be identified as the nature of the data prevents full anonymisation, transcripts are not available.