In response to the need for health economics modelers to apply more appropriate complex systems models to address complex challenges in public health, an international team of more than 40 experts in the field of complex systems models and economic evaluation has developed and recently published a guideline on the application of complex systems models to the economic evaluation of public health interventions. This paper introduces the development process and main content of the guidelines, which can provide references to facilitate the application of the guidelines by domestic researchers, aiming to ultimately improve the overall quality of public health research and services and improve the health of the population in China.
Objective To evaluate the ambulatory surgery mode by using health economical mothods and provide reference for optimization and decision of surgical operation mode. Methods The patients who underwent unilateral flexible ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotriphy for ureteral calculi in Xiangya Hospital, Central South University between January 1st to December 31th, 2015 were selected in this study, including 59 with ambulatory surgery mode (the ambulatory group) and 65 with special in-hospital surgery mode (the special group). The differences in average bed occupancy time, cost, therapeutic effect, and satisfaction between the two operation modes were compared. Results The average bed occupancy time in the ambulatory group and the special group was (1.03±0.18) and (6.35±0.74) days, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The patients in both groups were followed up for one month after the operation, and the incidence of complications was 6.8% (4/59) in the ambulatory group and 6.2% (4/65) in the special group, without significant difference (P>0.05). The satisfaction score in the ambulatory group and the special group was 96.48±0.23vs. 96.53±0.18 without significant difference (P>0.05). The differences in direct medical cost [(17 738.28±1 027.85)vs. (21 307.67±554.41) yuan], direct non-medical cost [(103.39±18.25) vs. (630.76±78.90) yuan], indirect cost[ (266.93±47.12) vs. (1 640.44±190.55) yuan], and total cost [(18 128.10±1 037.76) vs. (23 558.29±619.20) yuan] between the ambulatory group and the special group were all statistically significant (P<0.05). The treatment effect index in the ambulatory group and the special group was 0.96 and 1.05, respectively; the cost-effect ratio was 18 883.44 and 22 436.47, respectively. Sensitivity analysis showed that the adjusted cost-effect ratio in the ambulatory group (16 629.64) was still lower than that in the special group (20 534.91). Conclusions The cost-effect ratio of ambulatory surgery mode is superior than that of special in-hospital surgery mode, and there is no obvious difference in patients satisfaction between the two modes. Ambulatory surgery mode can be recommended to patients who meet the indications of day surgery.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the health economic evaluation studies in which externalities of antibacterial drug uses were identified.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect health economic evaluation studies in which externalities of antibacterial drug uses were identified from inception to December 31st, 2020. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Descriptive analysis was then performed.ResultsA total of 14 studies were included. Negative externalities and their impacts on costs and/or effectiveness were examined in 13 literature, and positive externalities in terms of an improvement in disease control were included in only one study. No study was found in which both negative and positive externalities were included. The methods used to quantify negative externalities included: only costs associated with drug resistance per prescription or per unit were calculated; both costs and health impacts associated with the second/third line treatments followed a treatment failure (due to drug resistance) were calculated using a decision tree. In one study in which positive externalities were measured, both health gain and cost reduction from an improvement in disease control (as a benefit of antibacterial drug uses) were calculated by constructing a dynamic model at the population level.ConclusionsWe propose that both the positive and negative externalities should be included in health economic evaluation. This can be achieved by measuring the relevant costs and health impacts in a broader perspective, using a disease-transmission dynamic model. In addition, to achieve an improved health utility measurement, disability-adjusted-life years rather than quality-adjusted-life years should be encouraged for use. Finally, both costs and effectiveness should be discounted.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the health economic evaluation of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). MethodsThe PubMed, Web of Science, EMbase, CNKI, WanFang Data and CBM databases were electronically searched to collect the health economic evaluations on NPC from inception to December 18, 2022. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. A descriptive analysis was performed. ResultsA total of 20 studies were included, which contained 14 about different drug combinations, 6 about chemotherapy and the comparison among intensity modulated radiotherapy, conventional radiotherapy and surgery. The results showed that for patients with recurrent, metastatic, or advanced NPC, compared with docetaxel plus cisplatin, fluorouracil plus cisplatin or docetaxel and cisplatin plus fluorouracil, gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GP) was the most economical, and compared with GP or camrelizumab plus GP, toripalimab plus GP (TGP) was more economical. For early-stage NPC, intensity modulated radiotherapy was not economical compared with conventional radiotherapy and surgery. ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that GP and TGP are economical and can be popularized clinically.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the economic evaluation research of anti-novel coronavirus infection drugs at home and abroad, so as to promote clinical rational drug use. MethodsThe PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMbase, Web of Science, INAHTA, SinoMed, WanFang Data, and CNKI databases were systematically searched from January 1, 2020 to March 25, 2023, to collect economic evaluation studies related to anti-novel coronavirus infection drugs. ResultsA total of 22 articles were included, among which 11 studies were conducted from the perspective of health system, and most of the studies performed cost estimation on direct medical costs. The overall compliance rate of the included studies ranged from 42% to 70%, with deficiencies in model setting, incomplete uncertainty analysis, and lack of stakeholder participation. The results showed that immunotherapy drugs (Dexamethasone, Tocilizumab), neutralizing antibody (REGEN-COV antibody), small molecule drugs (Baricitinib, Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir, Molnupiravir, Favipiravir) and statin were cost-effective. There was some variation in the results of the economic evaluation of Remdesivir. ConclusionAt present, there are few studies on the economic evaluation of drug interventions in COVID-19. Existing studies have pointed out that most drug interventions are cost-effective. It is suggested that more standardized pharmacoeconomic evaluation studies based on the actual situation of China epidemic should be carried out in the future.
Objective To systematically evaluate the pharmacoeconomic vaule of chemotherapy combined with rituximab for patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas (NHL). Methods A systematic literature search of cost-effectiveness studies on rituximab treating NHL published from 1998 to 2012 was carried out in following databases: PubMed, ScienceDirect, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). And the references of included studies were also retrieved manually. The studies were screened according to the pre-designed inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the incremental cost- effectiveness ratio (ICER) in comparison between chemotherapy plus rituximab and chemotherapy alone was systematically evaluated according to the literature evaluation index system. Results The average ICER of Rituximab treating NHL was 16 318/QALY, 17 688/QALY, and 22 461/QALY in the UK, Mainland Europe, and US, respectively. All the reported ICERs in the included studies were below the implemented country-specific thresholds. Conclusion Based on present foreign literature, the integrated therapy of chemotherapy and rituximab for NHL is supposed to be a better cost-effective therapy with ICER below the implemented country-specific thresholds.
It is potential for N-of-1 trials to evaluate economics of health care, however, it is still in the exploratory stage. With the advantage of accurate estimation of costs and effects, it is beneficial to promote the application of N-of-1 trials for economic evaluation in the era of precision medicine. In this study, we introduce the necessity, feasibility, selection, calculation of indicators and influence factors of N-of-1 trials for economic evaluation, and in order to provide references for researchers to perform related studies.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the economy of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) for COVID-19. MethodsThe Web of Science, PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, INAHTA, CNKI, WanFang Data and SinoMed databases were electronically searched to collect studies on health economic evaluations from 1 January 2020 to 20 August 2022. Then the included materials were reviewed, extracted and data integration analysis were conducted based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. ResultsSeventy-one academic publications were finally included, which contained 25 papers about nucleic acid testing, antigen testing and screening, 5 papers about personal protection, 12 papers about social distancing, quarantine and isolation, 11 papers about regional or national lockdown and 18 papers about multiple NPIs. The results showed that compared with no intervention, nucleic acid testing, antigen testing, screening and personal protection measures were economical. Social distancing, quarantine and isolation were also economical compared with no intervention. However, in low-income countries, movement restriction and factory shutdown may exact a heavy toll on the poorest and most vulnerable. Moreover, compared with a single long-term lockdown, multiple short-term lockdowns could be more economical, but the cost was still huge overall. ConclusionNPIs such as nucleic acid testing, antigen testing, personal protection, social distancing, quarantine, isolation and factory shutdown are economical. Although regional or national lockdown can save lives, it is not suitable for wide use. The researches on specific populations, specific variants (especially Omicron) and in the context of China need to be carried out.
Methodological quality and transferability will be important issues for the credibility and usefulness of both published studies and administrative methods for evaluating the socio-economic value of marketed medicines in China. This paper critically examines factors commonly contributing to, or inhibiting, the quality and transferability of socio-economic evidence of the value of medicines, with specific reference to the Chinese community. It discusses appropriate approaches to design, performance, and reporting of published economic evaluation studies, as well as guides on assessment of quality of economic evaluations and recommends two internationally established methods that may be suitable for training in this setting.
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.