Study on the accessibility and affordability of 50 drugs in Wuhan based on the WHO/HAI standardization method.

Objective: To understand the availability and affordability of essential drugs in Wuhan since the implementation of the national essential medicine system, and to provide a basis for the subsequent formulation and improvement of related policies. Methods: Using the standard survey method jointly developed by the WHO and Health Action International (HAI), a sample of 50 essential drugs was selected to investigate and evaluate their availability and affordability in public medical and health institutions and social retail pharmacies in Wuhan, using six diseases with high clinical morbidity as the targets. Results: The availability of the original drug and the lowest-priced generic drug in public hospitals is 26.4 and 42.47% respectively, and that in retail pharmacies is 26.8 and 54.4% respectively. The median price ratio of the original drug and the lowest-priced generic drug is 28.71 and 2.23 respectively in public hospitals, and 29.24 and 3.59 respectively in retail pharmacies; In addition to individual drugs, such as omeprazole, others are affordable. The availability of essential drugs in public hospitals in Wuhan is lower than that in social retail pharmacies, and the availability of the lowest-priced generic drugs is much higher than that of original drugs. Conclusion: The availability of essential drugs in public hospitals in Wuhan is lower than that in social retail pharmacies, and the availability of the lowest-priced generic drugs is much higher than that of original drugs. The price of the original drug is much higher than the international reference price; The price of medicines in public hospitals is lower than that in retail pharmacies;the overall condition of affordability is good, but there is a big gap between the affordability levels of original drugs and generic drugs, and the affordability of original drugs is relatively poor. It is recommended to adjust the relevant policies according to the actual situation of Wuhan city itself, moderately ensure the supply of original drugs, improve the price transparency of retail pharmacies, and ensure that the basic drug needs of the public are met.

The influencing factors of biomedical R&D cooperation in three major urban agglomerations of China based on cooperative patents.

Due to the particularity of biomedical industry, it has become necessary for biomedical enterprises to seek innovative research and development (R&D) cooperation to maintain advanced technologies and products in multiple fields. Under such circumstance, the biomedical industry has gradually formed a certain cluster to promote the development of the industry. So far, the biomedical industry cluster has formed in China, mainly within the Yangtze River Delta, Pearl River Delta, and Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei three urban agglomerations. Within the industrial clusters, the frequency of innovation cooperation among enterprises, universities, research institutions, and other relevant organizations in the biomedical area is high, and the capacity for innovation cooperation is strong as well. This paper used the representative cross-section data of cooperative patents from the medical science and technology patent database of China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), researching the R&D cooperation within the three major urban agglomerations in China from 2008 to 2016 (Yangtze River Delta Urban Agglomeration, Pearl River Delta Urban Agglomeration, Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Urban Agglomeration) on total 36 cities' spatial pattern characteristics of biomedical cooperation and the influencing factors. The spatial interaction model was used to study the spatial, economic, political, and R&D influencing factors of cross-city cooperation. The degree of aggregation showed that cross-city R&D cooperation mainly occurred in well-developed and central cities of urban agglomerations. Econometric results revealed that spatial, economic, political, and R&D bias factors did have a significant impact on the frequency of biomedical R&D cooperation across cities.

Cost-utility analysis of centrally inserted totally implanted access port (PORT) vs. peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) in the oncology chemotherapy.

Background: Peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) and centrally inserted totally implanted access port (PORT) are two types of intravenous infusion devices that are widely used in clinical practice. PORTs are more expensive to insert than PICCs but have fewer complications. Two cost-utility analyses of PICCs and PORTs in China have been published, but had conflicting findings. This study aimed to compare the cost-utility of PICCs and PORTs. Methods: We conducted a prospective observational trial including 404 patients with cancer and a cross-sectional study to calculate cost and complications of a PICC and PORT. Utility was measured using the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L). A cost-utility analysis was performed from a healthcare system perspective in China. Results: The average total cost of PICCs and PORTs were ¥ 4,091.7 and ¥ 4,566.8, which yielded 0.46 and 0.475 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) in a 6-month dwell time, respectively. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was ¥ 31,670.9 per QALY. A one-way sensitivity analysis showed that the base-case results were robust, and the probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of ¥ 80,976 per QALY (China's per capita GDP in 2021) the probability of a PORT being cost-effective was 96%. Conclusion: PORTs were more cost-effective than PICCs for a 6 and 12-month dwell time. The total cost for a PORT was also less than that of a PICC. PORT is therefore recommended as a medium to long-term intravenous delivery device in clinical practice.