Cost-Effectiveness of Low-Dose Compared to Standard-Dose Alteplase for Acute Ischemic Stroke in China: A Within-Trial Economic Evaluation of the ENCHANTED Study.

INTRODUCTION: The Enhanced Control of Hypertension and Thrombolysis Stroke Study (ENCHANTED) showed that a low-dose alteplase was safe but not clearly non-inferior to standard-dose alteplase in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Given the significant cost of this medicine, we undertook a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the probability that low-dose is cost-effective relative to standard-dose alteplase in China. METHODS: For ENCHANTED participants in China with available health cost data, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were undertaken in which death or disability (modified Rankin scale scores 2-6) at 90 days and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were used as outcome measures, respectively. There was adherence to standard guidelines for health economic evaluations alongside non-inferiority trials and according to a health-care payer's perspective. The equivalence margin for cost and effectiveness was set at USD 691 and -0.025 QALYs, respectively, for the base-case analysis. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate the probability of low-dose alteplase being non-inferior. RESULTS: While the mean cost of alteplase was lower in the low-dose group (USD 1,569 vs. USD 2,154 in the standard-dose group), the total cost was USD 56 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1,000-1,113) higher compared to the standard-dose group due to higher hospitalization costs in the low-dose group. There were 462 (95% CI: 415-509) and 410 (95% CI: 363-457) patients with death or disability per 1,000 patients in the low-dose and standard-dose groups, respectively. The low-dose group had marginally lower (0.008, 95% CI: -0.016-0.001) QALYs compared to their standard-dose counterparts. The low-dose group was found to have an 88% probability of being non-inferior based on cost-effectiveness versus the standard-dose group. CONCLUSIONS: This health economic evaluation alongside the ENCHANTED indicates that the use of low-dose alteplase does not save overall healthcare costs nor lead to a gain in QALYs in the management of Chinese patients with AIS compared to the use of standard dose. There is little justification on economic grounds to shift from standard-of-care thrombolysis in AIS.

Evaluating an oral health programme for the prevention of dental decay among school-aged children in China: protocol for a mixed-methods study based on the RE-AIM framework.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of the Comprehensive Intervention of Oral Disease for Children (CIODC) in China is to prevent dental decay for school-aged children and provide free prevention services in pilot areas beginning in 2008. It is a potentially affordable, acceptable and effective prevention strategy to use for more school-aged children in the future. There is a shortage of robust evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness, feasibility and scalability of prevention strategies for dental decay for school-aged children in China. This study aims to provide a comprehensive evaluation, including an economic evaluation and process evaluation, to better understand how and why the public health programme may be effective and economical. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Mixed methods will be used in this study. Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) will be conducted from a societal perspective, based on a modelling study over 6 years (from age 7 to 12) in terms of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per dental decay averted. The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework informed the process evaluation. An estimated 48-80 semistructured interviews with service providers, patient parents/caregivers and decision-makers under the logic model will be used in the progress evaluation to describe the feasibility and sustainability of CIODC. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has all necessary ethical approvals from the Ethics Committee of Anhui Medical University (number 2021H030). All participants will provide informed consent prior to participation. Findings will be disseminated through conference presentations and scientific publications in peer-reviewed journals.

Use of Cardiovascular Drugs for Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease Among Rural-Dwelling Older Chinese Adults.

Cardiovascular risk factors and related disorders are common among older adults, and use of various classes of cardiovascular (CV) drugs could reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, data are sparse with regard to the use of CV drugs among rural-dwelling older adults in China. Therefore, this population-based study aimed to describe use of CV drugs among older adults living in the rural communities in China, while taking into account the use of CV drugs for primary and secondary prevention of CVDs. This study included 5,246 participants (age ≥65 years; 57.17% women; 40.68% illiteracy) in the baseline examination of the MIND-China study. In March-September 2018, data on health-related factors, CVDs (ischemic heart disease, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and stroke), and CV drug use were collected via face-to-face survey, clinical examination, and laboratory tests. We classified CV drugs according to the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification system for western medications and specific cardiovascular effects for the products of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). We conducted descriptive analysis. The overall prevalence of major cardiovascular risk factors ranged from 14.30% in diabetes and 23.81% in dyslipidemia to 66.70% in hypertension, and CVDs affected 35.07% of all participants (36.28% in women vs. 33.47% in men, p = 0.035). In the total sample, calcium channel blockers (C08) were most commonly used (10.39%), followed by TCM products (7.64%), hypoglycemic agents (A10, 4.73%), renin-angiotensin system (RAS)-acting agents (C09, 4.61%), and lipid-lowering agents (C10, 4.17%). The proportions of CV drugs for primary prevention (i.e., use of CV drugs among people without CVD) were 3.14% for antithrombotic agents (mainly aspirin), 1.38% for lipid-lowering agents, and 3.11% for RAS-acting agents; the corresponding figures for secondary prevention (i.e., use of CV drugs among people with CVD) were 13.97%, 9.35%, and 7.39%. In conclusion, despite highly prevalent cardiovascular risk factors and CVDs, a fairly low proportion of the rural-dwelling older adults take CV medications for primary and secondary prevention. Notably, TCM products are among the most commonly used CV drugs. These results call for additional efforts to promote implementation of the evidence-based recommendations for prevention of CVDs in the primary care settings.