A Critical Review of Chinese Pharmacoeconomics Studies in the Last Five Years.

S. Feng,X. Ying,J. Lu,F. Qi,W. Wu,G. Dou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2014.08.466

IF: 5.156

2014-01-01

Value in Health

Abstract:More and more papers about pharmacoeconomics and outcome research were published in China. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of Chinese pharmacoeconomics study and outcome research through analyze papers published in the peer-reviewed literature in Chinese over the last five years. We conducted full-text paper searches in public databases from 2009 to 2013 in China. A search strategy and inclusion criteria were set up to identify the articles to be included. The search identified 820 studies, of which 411 were included. Then papers were evaluated through a framework which was based on Pharmacoeconomics guideline. Our results showed that a large number of published studies were of suboptimal quality. Most of pharmaceonomics and outcome research were conduct by doctors (33.6%) and pharmacists (54%) in China. Prospective studies (65.9%) were the most common study design, while most data were derived from the clinical trials; Only 8% of them included articles clearly stated the study perspective; More than half studies (56.2%) only computed drug expenditure in cost estimation; 2.2% of articles conducted discounting; 63.5% of studies performed the incremental analysis, however, most studies presented the cost-effectiveness ratios as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio; Sensitive analysis were reported by 71.3% of the included studies, nonetheless, the choice of variables for sensitivity analysis wasn’t justified; A few studies (7.3%) presented the transferability of the results. The above data signify that the quality of pharmacoeconomic evaluations needs improvement. There were just few studies which had well-designed schemes, high-qualified data and suitable methodology, partly owing to the doctors and pharmacists’ lack of pharmaceonomics expertise and knowledge. It implied China should improve the training of pharmaceonomics and outcome research training in doctors and pharmacists. Moreover, a further study of the new technology on pharmacoeconomy should not be neglected.