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 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.
Health economics analysis has become increasingly important in recent years. It is essential to master the use of relevant software to conduct research in health economics. TreeAge Pro software is widely used in the healthcare decision analysis. It can carry out decision analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, and Monte Carlo simulation. With powerful functionlity and outstanding visualization, it can build Markov disease transition models to analyze Markov processes according to disease models and accomplish decision analysis with decision trees and influence diagrams. This paper introduces cost-effectiveness analysis based on Markov model with examples and explains the main graphs.
Objective To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of three LTBI screening strategies: the tuberculin skin test (TST), the T-SPOT.TB and the combination of TST and T-SPOT (TST+T.SPOT), to provide economic evidence for T.SPOT application in China. Methods A decision analysis model evaluated three strategies among a cohort of 1000 tuberculosis (TB) close contacts, using incremental cost-effectiveness of prevention a active TB patient (1 year post contact). Meta analyses were conducted to calculate the key parameters of T.SPOT and TST. The official data or literature was searched and the unaccessible data was to specify other parameters, such as cost, LTBI prevalence, etc. The one-way sensitivity analysis was performed, varying key parameters over a wide range of reasonable values to evaluate the impact of data uncertainties and to determine the robustness of our overall conclusion. Results a) As for the total cost, the TST+T.SPOT strategy (?212 213.81 per 1 000 contacts) cost the least, while the single T.SPOT strategy cost the most; b) Subsequently, the TST+T.SPOT strategy required less contacts to be treated to prevent an active case of TB (8.31) than the single TST strategy (25.67); c) the TST+T.SPOT strategy shared the most cost-effectiveness (?3 063.50 per active TB case prevented) than the single TST or T.SPOT strategy; and d) The results of one-way sensitivity analyses showed that cost-effectiveness values were sensitive to changes in LTBI prevalence (gt;60%), Sen and Spn of TST test (gt;70%), with the single TST being superior to the single T.SPOT. Conclusion The Single T.SPOT strategy enjoys the most cases prevented from active TB, while the TST+S.SPOT strategy is the most cost-effective. The conclusion is sensitive to a few parameters, such as LTBI prevalence, but the TST+T.SPOT strategy is always the best.
ObjectiveTo compare medical cost and utilization efficiency of medical resources between manual layered anastomosis with mechanical stapling technique in esophagectomy. MethodsClinical data of 132 patients who underwent surgical resection of esophageal carcinoma in the Department of Thoracic Surgery of Gansu Tumor Hospital between January and October 2011 were respectively analyzed. According to different anastomotic techniques, all the patients were divided into a manual layered anastomosis group (including 40 males and 20 females with their age of 36-72 (49.3±7.6) years) and a mechanical stapling technique group (including 50 males and 22 females with their age of 30-79 (51.0±8.6) years). Demographic data, operation data, postoperative complications, direct and indirect medical cost, and constitution of direct medical cost were compared between the 2 groups. ResultsMedical cost of esophagectomy was 14 505.03± 1 523.37 yuan in the manual layered anastomosis group and 19 891.05±1 634.58 yuan in the mechanical stapling technique group respectively, which were statistically different (P < 0.05). Material cost was 2 242.00±751.08 yuan in the manual layered anastomosis group and 5 424.00±1 876.22 yuan in the mechanical stapling technique group respectively, which were statistically different (P < 0.05). Cost-effectiveness analysis showed that cost-effectiveness ratio in the manual layered anastomosis group was lower, thus this anastomotic technique was more reasonable. ConclusionMedical cost of manual layered anastomosis is lower than that of mechanical stapling technique in esophagectomy, as the utilization efficiency of medical resources of manual layered anastomosis is higher than that of mechanical stapling technique.
ObjectivesThis study aimed to study the economic effect of five kinds of detection systems for nucleic acid, which were based on five kinds of working electrodes: gold electrode, glassy carbon electrode, carbon paste electrode, screen printing electrode, and indium-tin-oxide (ITO) glass electrode.MethodsThe cost of completing a single test was taken as the cost of economic analysis. The Youden index was used to represent the effect of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). Meanwhile, the cost-utility analysis (CUA) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were used for the economic analysis of the corresponding system.ResultsThe cost of five detection systems based on gold electrode, glass carbon electrode, carbon paste electrode, screen printing electrode, and ITO glass electrode was 3.70 yuan/unit, 4.20 yuan/unit, 5.25 yuan/unit, 33.98 yuan/unit and 5.01 yuan/unit, respectively. The Youden indexes of all five systems were 1. The cost effectiveness (C/E) were 3.70, 4.20, 5.25, 33.98, and 5.01, respectively. The cost utility (C/U) were 6.61, 6.89, 9.91, 62.93, and 9.45, respectively. The C'/E and C'/U of the gold electrode detection system were the minimum (2.96 and 5.29). Compared with the system applying the gold electrode, the system using the glassy carbon electrode had ΔC >0 and ?E0 >0; When carbon paste electrode, screen printing electrode, and ITO glass electrode system were used, ?C was >0 and ?E0 was <0.ConclusionsFrom the perspective of CEA and CUA, the system using the gold electrode has the best economic effect. The sensitivity analysis proved the reliability of CEA and CUA results. According to the ICER, gold electrode or glassy carbon electrode can be used in clinical practice with the choice depending on the user.
ObjectiveTo compare the cost-effectiveness of etanercept combined with methotrexate to methotrexate plus placebo in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and to provide references for clinical practice.MethodsDecision tree model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness from the perspective of the health care system by TreeAge Pro 2016 software. The cost-effectiveness of the two treatments were compared by incremental analysis, and the robustness of the results were analyzed by sensitivity analysis.ResultsThe cost of etanercept combined methotrexate group in one year duration was ￥212 692, the effective rate (ACR50) was 66.4%; the cost of methotrexate combined with placebo group in one year duration was ￥572, the effective rate (ACR50) was 40.6%. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of two groups was ￥818 000/person, and the sensitivity analysis showed that the results were robust.ConclusionEtanercept combined methotrexate is significant more effective than methotrexat. But the cost of etanercept combined methotrexate is too high to afford and is not economical compared to methotrexate.
Onehealth, an evidence-based decision-making software, is based on the United Nations' epidemiological reference modules to predict the effect of health services. Onehealth is a large database. The software is using activitybased costing, simulating investment costs of health system and changes of mortality in different coverage levels. By the cost of inputs/avoid deaths, it could quantify the cost of health services effectiveness and provide an intuitive basis for the rational allocation of health resources. This study introduces the relevant concepts, model structures and applications of Onehealth. We took the study of child nutrition interventions in Sudan for example and to present Onehealth tool's operating. As a new auxiliary and evidence-based decision-making software with scientific and rigorous theoretical approach, Onehealth has practical significance on the national or regional macro decision-making.
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.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the status of economic evaluation of liver cancer screening in China, so as to provide reference for further studies.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data, CBM and VIP databases were searched to collect economic evaluation studies of liver cancer screening in China from inception to December, 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and conducted descriptive analysis of basic characteristics, methods of economic evaluation and main results as well as quality and uniformity of reporting.ResultsA total of 5 studies were included. Among them, the starting age of screening were found to be 35 to 45 years old; α-fetoprotein (AFP) testing and ultrasound examination combined procedure and screening interval of every 6 months were mostly evaluated. The quality of the 5 studies was satisfactory, and the uniformity of reporting was relatively acceptable, with a median score of 78% (range: 60% ~ 78%). Two population-based studies reported cost per liver cancer detected (44 thousand and 575 thousand yuan). Three studies reported cost-effectiveness ratio(CER) based on life year saved (LYS) and quality adjusted life year (QALY). Among these results, only 1 study from mainland China reported CER based on LYS (1 775 yuan), and the calculated ratio of CER to local GDP per capita was estimated as 0.1, while 2 studies from Taiwan province reported 4 CERs, and the ratios of CER to local GDP per capita ranged from 1.0 to 2.2.ConclusionsInformation from liver cancer endemic areas such as Taiwan province indicates promising cost-effectiveness to conduct liver cancer screening in local general population, while data from mainland suggests that conducting liver cancer screening combining AFP and ultrasound in high-risk population will be cost-effective, however only supported by 1 regional study. This needs to be verified by further economic evaluations based on randomized controlled trials or cohort studies as well as health economic evaluations.