ObjectiveTo assess the health effectiveness, cost and cost effectiveness of different oral anticoagulation (OAT) therapies in China, including warfarin plus international normalized ratio (INR) test in hospital labs (Lab test), warfarin plus patient self-management (PSM) with point of care device, and novel anticoagulant (Dabigatran) alone. MethodsA Markov model containing four states (no complication, hemorrhagic event, thrombotic event and death) was developed to account for long-term cost and outcomes of warfarin/novel anticoagulant users including atrial fibrillation patients and deep venous thrombosis patients. Direct medical cost was taken into consideration, covering expenses of drugs, OAT monitoring and complication management. Both clinical and cost parameters were mainly derived from literatures. ResultsCompared with hospital lab test, the PSM pattern obtained a prolonged 8.48 years and 5.08 QALYs with the larger amount of cost, CNY 47 482. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of PSM versus hospital lab test came to CNY 19 240 per QALY gained, lower than GDP China per capita in 2014 (CNY 46 628). And the novel anticoagulant pattern was dominated by PSM pattern due to shortened QALYs while increased cost. The sensitivity analysis demonstrated the results were not sensitive to main indicators, including utility in different health status, complication probability, and disease management cost. ConclusionPSM can generate more QALYs by reducing the risk of major thrombotic and bleeding events with acceptable incremental cost, which turns to be the most cost effective way among the 3 patterns and demonstrates promising future in OAT management.
Objective To evaluate the cost effectiveness of four different mechanisms clinical commonly used antidepressants, namely, amitriptyline, escitalopram, mirtazapine and venlafaxine in the treatment of moderate-severe depressive disorder in China and to provide clinicians with some advice. Methods We carried out the cost-effectiveness analysis of four antidepressants by establishing a decision tree model. The parameters uncertainty in the model was estimated through one-way sensitivity analysis. Results In terms of average cost-effectiveness ratio (CER), amitriptyline’s was 45.24 RMB, which was the lowest. And the CERs of mirtazapine, escitalopram and venlafaxine were 273.71 RMB, 332.00 RMB and 716.58 RMB, respectively. While in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), venlafaxine was excluded as the dominated strategy. When the threshold value of willingness to pay (WTP) was less than 3 420.92 RMB, amitriptyline was the most cost-effective; when the threshold value ranges between 3 420.92 RMB and 4 200 RMB, mirtazapine was the most cost-effective; and when the threshold value was over 4 200 RMB, escitalopram was the most cost-effective. In the one-way sensitivity analysis, when we changed the four kinds of drugs costs within a certain range, the results was not changed with the change of venlafaxine’s cost but changed with the other three drugs costs. Conclusion Clinicians may choose the most cost-effective therapy according to patients’ different WTP values. We suggests that health care institutions should encourage the use of escitalopram clinically and provide subsidies for patients so as to increase the overall society benefit.
目的:比较国产生长抑素与进口生长抑素治疗消化性溃疡出血的经济效果。方法:将120例消化性溃疡伴出血的患者随机分成国产生长抑素及进口生长抑素组,分别给予国产生长抑素、进口生长抑素治疗3天,观察疗效,并进行药物经济学评价。 结果: 国产生长抑素、进口生长抑素治疗上消化道出血成本分别为558元和4116元,有统计学差异(P＜005);有效率分别为925%和968%,无统计学差异 (Pgt;005),成本—效果比分别为60324和425207,有统计学差异(P＜005)。结论: 从药物经济学角度分析,国产生长抑素治疗消化性溃疡出血较进口生长抑素更为经济。
Objective This study analyzed the medical expenditure and its influential factors, and compared the clinical effectiveness and medical expenditure of three major drugs. Methods We designed the cohort study to compare the difference of medical and pharmaceutical expenditures between patients with and without underlying diseases. Multi-linear regression was applied to analyze the influential factors. Incremental expenditure-effectiveness ratio was applied to study three clinically important drugs. Results The curing rate of non-critical patients was statistically significant than critical patients (73.68%, 99.38%, P=0.000) .The curing rate of non-critical patients without underlying diseases was statistically significant than those with underlying diseases in the cohort (96%, 99.66%, P=0.001 6). No significance was identified in the critical patients cohort. The medical expenditure of non-critical patients with and without underlying diseases were 7 879.22 and 7 172.23 RMB per capita, respectively. Accordingly, the medical expenditure in critical patients was 24 912.89 and 26 433.53 RMB per capita. No significance was identified in the two cohorts. Medical expenditure was positively correlated with age and disease severity, with its equation y=4585.71+79.04X1+17188.87X2 (X1: age, X2: disease severity). Regarding the clinical effectiveness and medical expenditure, no significance was identified in critical patients who administered small and medium dose of Methylprednisolone. The expenditure-effectiveness ratios of Ribavirin that was administered by non-critical patients without underlying dissuades were 6 107 and 4 225 RMB, respectively. Accordingly, the expenditure-effectiveness ratios of Thymosin were 11 651 and 6 107 RMB. Conclusions The curing rate of non-critical patients without underlying diseases was higher than the counterpart in the cohort. No influence of underlying diseases was found in the critical patient cohort. Medical expenditure was positively correlated with age and disease severity. Small-and-medium dose of Methylprednisolone might not influence the curing rate and medical expenditure in critical patients. The effectiveness of Thymosin for non-critical patients with and without underlying diseases was not significantly different. However, additional 5 877 RMB occurred if Thymosin was administrated. Likewise, the effectiveness of Ribavirin for non-critical patients remains the same. However, additional 1 082 RMB was consumed in Ribavirin-administrated patient.
The application of economic tools to evaluate the cost and health benefits and screen out more cost-effective drugs and technologies is an important measure to improve efficiency of medical resource allocation in China. Given the inherent differences between strict clinical trials and clinical routine practice, using trial-based economic evaluations to guide relevant medical decisions may lead to a certain risk of value deviation. Recent development of real-world data provides opportunities to assess the cost-effectiveness of drugs under the practical utilization, and has gradually become a new research hotspot. However, the complexity of the actual clinical environment also puts higher demands on researchers and decision makers to construct, understand and apply real-world evidence. In order to further prompt the normalization of economic evaluation based on real-world data and promote the scientific application of real-world evidence in medical and health decision-making, this project aims at the crucial issues including scope, research design and quality evaluation, to clarify the key considerations on the using of real-world evidence in medical decision-making. Combined with the international guidelines, the latest advancement of relevant research areas and the advice and opinions from multidisciplinary experts, we aim to provide technical references and guidance for researchers and decision makers, and to strengthen the evidence base of management policies.
Objective To compare the economic effectiveness of universal screening, high-risk population screening, and no screening strategies for thyroid disease prevention and control among pregnant women in China through cost-effectiveness analysis, providing evidence-based support for optimizing health policy decisions on prenatal thyroid disease screening. Methods Based on the characteristics of thyroid disorders during pregnancy, a combined decision tree and Markov model was developed to conduct a lifetime cost-effectiveness analysis across three strategies: no screening, high-risk population screening, and universal screening. Sensitivity analyses were performed on key parameters. Results Base-case analysis demonstrated that universal screening was the most cost-effective strategy when the World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended payment threshold of 1×gross domestic product (GDP) per capita was used, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 20636.18 yuan per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) compared to no screening, followed by high-risk population screening (ICER=21071.71 yuan/QALY). The results of the sensitivity analysis showed a strong stability of the model. Conclusions Of the 3 screening programs for thyroid disease in pregnancy, universal screening is the most cost-effective when the WHO-recommended payment threshold of 1×GDP per capita is used.
Objective To investigate the clinical effectiveness of the total Flavones of Hippophae Rhamnoides L. (TFH) and compare its cost-effectiveness ratio with enalapril in patients with essential hypertension. Methods Among 3 971 staff members in two universities, 155 eligible patients with blood pressure (BP) ≥160/100 mmHg were screened and included in this study. By using a random number table, the patients were randomized to the two groups: TFH was given to the treatment group while enalapril in the control group. At the end of the six week, BP, total cost and cost-effectiveness ratio were measured in both TFH and enalapril groups. Results After six weeks, blood pressures in the TFH and enalapril groups decreased by 12.7±11.6/8.1±5.1 mmHg and 15.2±9.7/10.1±7.3 mmHg respectively, while the improvement rates of BP were 73.24% (52/71) and 74.65% (53/71) respectively. There were no differences between TFH and enalapril groups in lowering BP amplitude and total effectiveness rate. The incidence of side effect in TFH group was 11.27% (8/71), which was significantly lower than that of enalapril 29.6% (21/71). The total cost of TFH group was 9 294.6 RMB with the cost effectiveness ratio of 732/1 147 RMB per mmHg and 179 RMB per case. In the enalapril group, the total cost added up to 13 236 RMB with cost effectiveness ratio of 870/1 310 per mmHg and 250 RMB per case. Sensitivity analysis indicated that TFH was better than enalapril with respect to clinical economic value even when enalapril price dropped to 1.8 RMB for tablet (5 mg). Conclusion Compared with enalapril, TFH is an effective and economic drug in treating patients with hypertension.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the comparative cost-effectiveness of thrombolysis treatment of ischemic stroke based on outcomes of CT perfusion (CTP). MethodsWe applied the methods of systematic review to evaluate the studies abroad about the cost effectiveness of CTP diagnosis outcomes used for selecting stroke patients for thrombolysis treatment. We also evaluated the domestic studies about the cost-effectiveness of CTP in China by establishing a decision tree model. ResultsA total of 2 economics studies were included. The results showed that, the cost-effectiveness ratios of CT, CTP and MRI for selecting stroke patients for thrombolysis treatment were 2 983.7 ￡/QALY, 2 951.4 ￡/QALY and 2 982.9 ￡/ QALY, respectively, in the UK; 100 483.5＄/QALY and 99 406.1＄/QALY just for CT and CTP, respectively, in the US; and the evaluation outcomes by establishing the decision tree model showed that, 113 492.4 ￥/QALY, 113 615￥/QALY and 120 831.9 ￥/QALY, respectively, in China. ConclusionAll international and domestic studies' results show that CTP is more cost-effective than CT/MRI in selecting stroke patients for thrombolysis treatment.