Based on review and practice of literature search of clinical economic evaluation, We have discussed the source and search strategy of literatures of clinical economic evaluation. A sample on antibiotics in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia was shown concurrently.
ObjectivesTo systematically review the methods of pharmacoeconomic evaluation model for hepatitis C therapies and to identify shortcomings of the existing modeling research by comparing the model structure, hypothesis and methodological differences, and to provide suggestions for the construction of high-quality hepatitis C pharmacoeconomic evaluation models.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI and WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect relevant literatures on the pharmacoeconomic evaluation models for hepatitis C therapies from August 2014 to August 2019. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of the included studies. Then, the data related to the model structure, methods, and assumptions were compared and summarized.ResultsMost of the 46 studies that finally included used similar modeling methods. Ignoring different modeling elements would cause overestimation or underestimation of the value of hepatitis C therapies. Model structure of all studies were similar and key parameters were from the same source. Forty-five studies measured the cost of drugs and medical cost of health status. All studies used quality-adjusted life years as the outcome and reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Thirty studies conducted one-way sensitivity analysis and probability sensitivity analysis.ConclusionsThe included studies share similar methodological designs and have high quality in general. However, there are some differences and deficiencies in research perspective, model types, model assumptions and model verification. Future pharmacoeconomic evaluation model of hepatitis C therapies should report the results of the whole society, establish dynamic model to consider the impact of transmission, make half-cycle correction for long periods, consider the recurrence after cure, model liver transplantation, and verify the model.
This article aims to explore the application of health economics evidence in the development of clinical practice guidelines and evidence recommendations, and to provide better references for clinical decision-making. By reviewing the use of health economics evidence in domestic and international clinical practice guidelines, the difficulties in the application of health economics evidence in the development of clinical practice guidelines and evidence recommendations were summarized. It was found that there were significant differences in the use of health economics evidence in clinical practice guidelines in different countries, and these differences were affected by the goals of clinical practice guidelines and limitations of health economics evidence itself, lacking standardized methodological guidance, resulting in limited use of health economics evidence in clinical practice guidelines. Therefore, further research is needed to optimize the integration of health economics and clinical practice guidelines, and develop standardized methodological guidance.
ObjectiveUnder the principle of promoting the reform of TCM payment methods, analyzing the difference in efficacy and cost of treatment using Western medicine or traditional Chinese medicine, and providing health economics basis for the reform of payment methods for advantageous diseases of TCM. MethodsData from the first page of medical records of 4 Chinese hospitals and 4 western hospitals of the same level were collected from 2020 to 2021 in typical areas, focusing on four typical TCM advantageous diseases that were consistent with diabetes, cervical spondylosis, arthralgia syndrome in the lumbar area or pelvic inflammation, and a total of 14 958 cases were included through propensity score matching. Under the assumption of same disease, same effect and same price, the age, bed days, total cost, discharge condition and reoperation condition of the same disease in 90 days were analyzed and compared between the two groups. ResultsIn terms of outcomes, the experimental group showed significantly better discharge outcomes compared with the control group for the four diseases. In terms of cost, the control group had higher total costs for arthralgia syndrome in the lumbar area and cervical spondylosis, while the control group had lower total costs for diabetes. After controlling for treatment effects, the control group had higher costs for cervical spondylosis and pelvic inflammatory disease compared to the experimental group, while the control group had lower costs for diabetes and arthralgia syndrome in the lumbar area compared to the experimental group. ConclusionThe experimental group shows better treatment effectiveness for the four TCM-dominant diseases. The control group has higher costs for cervical spondylosis and pelvic inflammatory disease when discharge outcomes are limited, while the control group has lower costs for diabetes and arthralgia syndrome in the lumbar area. This highlights the necessity of reforming the payment methods for TCM-dominant diseases. Additionally, the development of TCM-dominant diseases should focus on addressing the high demand for elderly chronic diseases in TCM.