Objective To Investigate the disease constitution and hospitalization expense in Luxi township health center (LxC) in Yongxi county of Jiangxi Province in 2010, to make clear about the local burden of diseases and to provide the baseline data for further study. Methods The inpatient records of LxC in 2010 were collected. Based on the primary diagnosis on hospital discharge record, the diseases were standardized and classified according to the International Classification of Disease, 10th Edition (ICD-10). Data including general information of the inpatients, discharge diagnosis, hospitalization expense and usage of essential medicine etc, were reorganized and analyzed by using Microsoft Excel 2003 and SPSS 13.0 software. Results a) The total number of inpatients were 925 in 2010, with male/female ratio of 0.8; b) The disease spectrum included 17 categories, accounting for 81% of the ICD-10; c) The top 5 diseases were in respiratory, digestive, injury, poisoning amp; external causes, circulatory and genitourinary system, totally accounting for 82.27%; d) The top 15 single diseases were upper respiratory infection, fracture, chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD), chronic gastroenteritis, cerebrovascular disease (CVD), calculi in urinary system, rheumatoid arthritis, intervertebral discs diseases, cholecyslithiasis accompanied with cholecystitis, cardiac disease, reproductive organ diseases, injury amp; poisoning, pneumonia, hypertension and peptic ulcer; e) The patients with upper respiratory infection and pneumonia were mostly older than 65 or younger than 5 years old. With the exception of calculi in urinary system and peptic ulcer, all the other 8 chronic diseases were mainly seen in patients over 65 years old; f) Among the 15 single diseases as listed above, the chronic diseases were associated with shorter average hospital stay and low average expense compared with the acute diseases (4.8 d vs. 11.6 d; ?439.1 vs. ?666.9); and g) The hospitalization expense of LxC, although increasing year by year, was still far below that of the national township health centers (?542.3 vs. ?1 004.6). Conclusion a) The top 3 in inpatients systematic diseases of LxC are respiratory system, digestive system, and injury and poisoning; the former 2 diseases attack more often in females, and the acute diseases are mainly infection and fracture; b) Except for rheumatoid arthritis, cholecyslithiasis accompanied cholecystitis, cardiac diseases, reproductive organ diseases and peptic ulcer, all the other 10 of the top 15 single diseases are similar to Yong’an township health center (YaC) in Sichuan Province in 2010; c) The acute diseases mainly focus on respiratory system, and injury and poisoning, and the chronic diseases mainly focus on digestive system, circulatory system, genitourinary system, the musculoskeletal system and connective tissue system; d) The number of patients who suffer from chronic diseases increases significantly when over of 35 years old, especially, often seen in female rather than male. The acute burden diseases is serious in patients less than 15 or more than 45 years old; e) The upper respiratory infection and pneumonia mainly affect the old and children; f) Compared with Xintian township health center (XtC) in Gansu Province, the average hospital stay of fracture patients is longer (43.7 d vs. 9.0 d), the hospitalization expense is higher (?1 948.0 vs. ?1 648.3), and the diseases is burden heavier (8.1% vs. 4.9%); and g) The average hospital stay of patients with acute diseases is longer than YaC and XtC (11.6 d vs. 3.7 d, 6.2 d), but the hospitalization expense is lower than both of them (?666.9 vs. ?850.4, ?906.9).
Objective To provide baseline datum for further evidence-based selecting essential health technology or essential medicine by comparing the top 15 inpatient diseases in the three pilot township clinics in western China from 2008 to 2010. Methods With the key words as disease spectrum, constitution of disease, inpatient disease category, inpatient diseases and so on, such databases as CBM, CNKI, VIP, WanFang and official websites of Ministry of Health were searched on computer, and the manual search was also conducted in combination to extract the related datum of provinces where the pilot township health centers were situated. The Excel software was used for data classification and analyses. Results (1) Among the 16 included literatures including 15 journal papers and 1 master thesis, 4 scored from zero to 3.5, 9 scored from 3.5 to 6.75, and the left 3 scored 7 or more than 7; (2) The common inpatient diseases in the township health centers in eastern, central and western regions in China were different. The upper respiratory tract infection, acute/chronic bronchitis, acute/chronic gastritis and appendicitis were the common inpatient diseases in the township health centers throughout China. The pneumonia, emphysema, cholelithiasis, cholecystitis, and acute/chronic gastroenteritis were the common inpatient diseases in the township health centers in southwest and northwest regions. The top 15 inpatient diseases in the three pilot township clinics in this study covered all the common inpatient diseases in the township health centers in southwest and northwest regions in China; (3) The total number of the top 15 inpatient diseases of the three pilot township health centers in western China between 2008 and 2010 was 35, including 20 chronic and 15 acute diseases. The chronic diseases were chronic bronchitis, chronic gastritis, hypertension, lumbar/cervical disease, cholelithiasis or cholecystitis, coronary heart disease, chronic pulmonary heart disease, urinary calculi, pelvic inflammation, vertebrobasilar insufficiency, arthritis, acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis, Meniere’s disease, chronic obstructive emphysema, myocardial ischemia, prostatitis, etc.. The acute diseases were upper respiratory tract infection, pulmonary infection, fracture, superficial injury, acute appendicitis, acute bronchitis, urinary tract infection, acute gastritis, acute gastroenteritis, delivery amp; cesarean section, soft tissue injury, acute urticaria, etc.; and (4) While the common inpatient disease categories were relatively centralized and stable, but some of them were different in regions, inpatients’ age and sex structure. Conclusion (1) There are some differences in the common inpatient diseases in the township health centers among eastern, central and western regions in China, thus it is necessary to select essential health technology and essential medicine according to local conditions; (2) As a good representation, the common inpatients diseases in the three pilot township health centers in western China can provide the baseline evidence for selecting essential health technology and essential medicine for the township health centers in western China; (3) There are lack of national/regional statistics, survey data and evidence-based research on disease spectrum of the township health centers currently. While the investigation methods or statistics measurements/quality of these included studies are variable without standard regulation; and (4) It suggests that the state and every provinces should implement and improve the statistic analysis of disease spectrum of the township health centers, train staffs and fulfill the construction of information system.
Objective To evaluate and select essential medicine for herniated lumbar disc based on the burden of disease for township health centers located in eastern, central and western regions of China. Methods By means of the approaches, criteria, and workflow set up in the second article of this series, we referred to the recommendations of evidence-based or authority guidelines from inside and outside China, collected relevant evidence from domestic clinical studies, and recommended essential medicine based on evidence-based evaluation. Data were analyzed by Review Manager (RevMan) 5.1 and GRADE profiler 3.6 to evaluate quality of evidence. Results (1) Six clinical guidelines on herniated lumbar disc were included, five of which were evidence-based. (2) In total, there were 35 medicines (of four classes) listed in the guidelines. (3) We offer a b recommendation for paracetamol and ibuprofen as essential medicine and a weak recommendation for aspirin, indometacin and diazepam according to WHOEML (2011), NEML (2009), CNF (2010), clinical guidelines and the quantity and quality of evidence. (4) Five recommended medicines have been marketed in China with the dosage forms and specifications corresponding to guidelines and their prices were affordable (0.31 to 3.38 yuan daily). (5) Results of domestic low-quality studies indicated that ibuprofen and aspirin were effective with efficiencies of 63% to 84.5%; however, both of which were less effective than other trial medicines (efficiencies: 88.60% to 95.2%). We didn’t find any efficacy or pharmacoeconomic evidence of other medicines in Chinese literature databases. Conclusion (1) Pharmacotherapy should focus on symptomatic treatment of herniated lumbar disc. (2) We offer a b recommendation for paracetamol and ibuprofen used in the treatment of herniated lumbar disc and a weak recommendation for aspirin, indometacin and diazepam. (3) There is lack of evidence and high-quality guidelines on pharmacotherapy of lumbar intervertebral disc in China, especially pharmacoeconomic evidence. (4) We propose that guidelines should be established in basis of evidence so as to effectively direct clinical treatment. The effect of medicine in clinical practice should be based on current evidence from inside and outside China.
Objective To establish standards, methods and processes for evidence-based evaluation and selection of essential medicine that meet the needs of the 8 pilot township health centers in China. Methods A descriptive analysis was conducted to compare the similarities/differences and the advantages/disadvantages of the standards, methods and processes between the World Health Organization (WHO) essential medicines evaluation and selection, and the GRADE evidence quality and recommend intensity. In combination with the former outcomes of this series of study, the standards, methods and processes of evidence-based evaluation and selection of essential medicines in the domestic pilot township health centers were optimized, restructured and improved. Softwares such as GRADEprofiler were used to assess the quality of evidence. Results a) Localized standards, methods and processes for evidence-based evaluation and selection of essential medicine were established, and the evaluation tool was ascertained; and b) Disease and drug names, guidelines and searching processes for evaluation and selection of essential medicine were developed with standardized, systematic and transparent approaches. Conclusion a) Standards, methods and processes for searching, evaluating and recommending the best evidence are preliminarily established, through comparative analysis on the effectiveness, safety, cost-effectiveness and applicability of the candidate medicines for diagnosing, treating and preventing diseases in township health centers in China; b) Following the principle of “utilizing the best existing evidences and developing the urgently-needed but lacking evidence”, a good exploration was done for the localization, standardization and transparency of the standards, methods and processes of evidence-based evaluation and selection of essential medicine for pilot township health centers.
Abstract Objective To investigate the disease constitution and hospitalization expenses in Songqiao Central Township Health Center (SqC) in Gaoyou City of Jiangsu Province in 2010, so as to provide the baseline data of disease burden for further study. Methods The inpatient records of SqC in 2010 were collected. The first discharge diagnoses were classified according to the International Classification of Disease 10 (ICD-10). The general information of the inpatients, discharge diagnosis, hospitalization expenses, disease category, age, gender, and reimbursement of expenses were described and analyzed by using Microsoft Excel 2003 and SPSS 13.0 software. Results a) The total number of inpatients was 1036 in 2010, and the gender ratio was about 1.0 (50.7% vs. 49.3%); b) The disease spectrum included 17 categories. The cumulative percents of the top 5 systematic diseases were 81.2%, including the respiratory, digestive, neoplasm, circulatory diseases, and injury, poisoning amp; external causes; c) The top 15 diseases were pneumonia, fracture, malignant neoplasm, benign neoplasm, acute bronchitis, cerebral infarction, hypertension, acute appendicitis, emphysema, cholecystolithias accompanied with cholecystitis, inguinal hernia, coronary heart disease, diabetes mellitus, chronic bronchitis and superficial injury; d) The patients suffering from pneumonia and acute bronchitis were mainly over 65 years old and younger than 5; e) The number of chronic diseases significantly increased with age, especially after the age of 35 years old, and reached the peak at the age over 65 years old; while the acute diseases were mainly distributed at the age younger than 15 yeas old and older than 65 years old. The average length of stay, the total hospitalization and out-of-pocket expenses per capita of the chronic diseases were more than those of the acute ones (13.8 days vs. 9.9 days, ? 3 082 vs. ? 2 615; ? 417 vs. ? 371, respectively); f)The length of stay and total hospitalization per capita were quite higher than the other township health centers (11.6 days vs. 5.2 days, ? 3 001.4 vs. ? 1 004.6); and g) Both of the total reimbursement and out-of-pocket expenses per capita accounted for 44%-57% of the total hospitalization expenses. Among the total reimbursement, the payment from New Cooperative Medical Scheme (NCMS) accounted for over 99%, while that from Medical Aid Scheme only accounted for less than 2%. Conclusion a) The top 3 systematic diseases of SqC are seen in respiratory system, digestive system and neoplasm. The acute diseases are mainly pneumonia and fracture; b) The number of acute or chronic diseases increases significantly with age, especially after 35 years old. Both adolescents and the aged suffer from the heaviest burden of diseases; c) The average length of stay and hospitalization expenses pre capita of SqC are much higher than those of the other township health centers; and d) NCMS is the major source of reimbursement. However, the proportion of out-of-pocket expenses and the burden of diseases are still very high and heavy. Thus the policy of NCMS needs to be adjusted step by step in future.
Objective To evaluate and select essential medicine for diabetes mellitus based on the burden of disease. Methods By means of the approaches, criteria, and workflow set up in the second article of this series, we referred to the recommendations of evidence-based or authority guidelines from inside and outside China, collected relevant evidence from domestic clinical studies, and recommended essential medicine based on evidence-based evaluation. Data were analyzed by Review Manager (RevMan) 5.1 and GRADE profiler 3.6 to evaluate quality of evidence. Results (1) Six guidelines were included, three of which were evidence-based and published from 2006 to 2011. (2) Five recommended medicines were included according to recommendations and evidence of WHOEML (2011), NEML (2009), CNF (2010) and other guidelines. They were metformin, glibenclamide, glipizide, rosiglitazone and pioglitazone. Domestic evidence of the first three drugs was evaluated. (3) The first three have been marketed with the specifications and dosage forms corresponding to guidelines in China. The FBG cost-effectiveness ratios of metformin with different dosage forms as immediate release compressed tablet, enteric-coated tablet and sustained release capsule were 3.37, 3.76 and 3.50 respectively. 2-hour BG cost-effectiveness ratios of metformin were 3.74, 4.00 and 3.71 respectively. The cost-effectiveness ratio of glibenclamide and glimepiride were 11.23 and 13.81 respectively. Conclusion We offer a recommendation for: (1) Metformin (immediate release tablet/capsule for oral use, 0.25 g), contraindicated in patients with renal insufficiency. (2) Glibenclamide (tablet, 2.5 mg; capsule, 1.75 mg) and glipizide (tablet, 2.5 or 5mg; dispersible tablet, 5 mg), contraindicated in children, women during pregnancy or lactation, patients in the perioperative period of major operation, patients after total pancreatectomy, and patients allergic or adversely reacted to sulfa drug. (3) Evidence-based and standardized primary healthcare guidelines as well as clinical and pharmacoeconomic studies on diabetes mellitus (large-scale, multi-centre, randomized and double-blinded) are needed to produce high-quality local evidence.
Objective To evaluate and select essential medicine for middle-aged and elderly women with primary osteoporosis using evidence-based methods based on the burden of disease. Methods By means of the approaches, criteria, and workflow set up in the second article of this series, we referred to the recommendations of evidence-based or authority guidelines from inside and outside China, collected relevant evidence from domestic clinical studies, and recommended essential medicine based on evidence-based evaluation. Data were analyzed by Review Manager (RevMan) 5.1 and GRADE profiler 3.6 to evaluate quality of evidence. Results (1) 18 guidelines were included, 14 of which were evidence-based or based on expert consensus. Recommended medicines included bisphosphonates, calcitonin, estrogen, parathyroid hormone, selective estrogen receptor modulator, strontium and Chinese patent drug. (2) A result of one quasi-RCT (very low quality) indicated that caltrate D had a better effect on elderly women with primary osteoporosis than calcium gluconate in improving bone mineral density (BMD) (MD=0.04, 95%CI 0.02 to 0.06) and ameliorating bone ache ( RR=2.64, 95%CI 1.40 to 4.96). A few cases treated by caltrate D presented with adverse reaction such as gastrointestinal discomfort, poor appetite, constipation and nausea which disappeared later. Caltrate D (calcium carbonate D3) with good applicability cost 1.00 yuan daily. (3) A result of one RCT (low quality) indicated that alendronate had a better effect than caltrate D in improving L2-L4 BMD (MD=0.06, 95%CI 0.017 to 0.10) and ameliorating bone ache (RR=1.8, 95%CI 1.40 to 2.52). A result of two RCTs (moderate quality) indicated that alendronate plus calcium carbonate plus vitamin D6 had a better effect than calcium carbonate plus vitamin D in improving L2-L4 BMD (MD=0.05, 95%CI 0.02 to 0.08) and reducing blood alkaline phosphatase (MD=–31.9, 95%CI –54.99 to –8.81). There were slight adverse effects mainly including gastrointestinal reaction. Alendronate with fairly poor applicability cost 2.67 yuan daily. (4) A result of one RCT (moderate quality) indicated that after a 3-month treatment, Xian Ling Gu Bao Jiao Nang (name of a Chinese patent drug, abbreviated as XLGB) plus calcium preparation had a better effect than calcium preparation alone (MD=10, 95%CI 0.05 to 0.15). A result of one RCT (moderate quality) indicated that given for 3 to 6 months, XLGB plus calcium preparation was superior to calcium preparation alone in increasing the density of Ward’s triangle and the great femoral trochanter. A result of one RCT (low quality) indicated that XLGB plus calcitriol had a better effect than calcitriol alone in pain relief (RR=1.26, 95%CI 1.04 to 1.52). There were slight adverse effects mainly including reaction in the digestive system, the circulatory system and the skin. XLGB with good applicability cost 4.58 yuan daily. Conclusion We offer a weak recommendation for alendronate applied to middle-aged and elderly women with primary osteoporosis and pain and fracture caused by primary osteoporosis. We also offer a b recommendation for caltrate D and XLGB applied to middle-aged and elderly women with primary osteoporosis and pain and fracture caused by primary osteoporosis. In addition, we propose that the census on elder people with osteoporosis in rural areas should be carried out. More clinical and pharmacoeconomic studies of large-sample, high-quality on alendronate and its calcium preparation for adult osteoporosis are needed in China.
Objective To evaluate and select essential medicine for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) using evidence-based methods based on the burden of disease. Methods By means of the approaches, criteria, and workflow set up in the second article of this series, we referred to the recommendations of evidence-based or authority guidelines from inside and outside China, collected relevant evidence from domestic clinical studies, and recommended essential medicine based on evidence-based evaluation. Data were analyzed by Review Manager (RevMan) 5.1 and GRADE profiler 3.6 to evaluate quality of evidence. Results (1) Eleven guidelines were included (nine foreign guidelines, two domestic guidelines; nine based on evidence, two based on expert consensus). For CAP, amoxicillin amp; clavulanate potassium had efficiencies of 77.1% and an incidence of 18.8% as to adverse reaction that mainly included gastrointestinal reaction, skin rashes, etc. Piperacillin/tazobactam had an efficiency of 92.1% and a bacterial clearance rate of 88.9%. Cefuroxime had an efficiency of 89% and a bacterial clearance rate of 85.5%. There was no statistical significance between azithromycin and cefuroxime for CAP (RR=0.98, 95%CI 0.9 to 1.06); however, azithromycin was superior to cefuroxime in shortening fever-relief time (MD=–0.98, 95%CI –1.24 to –0.55) and cough-relief time (MD=–1.36, 95%CI –1.94 to –0.78). Efficiencies of ceftriaxone, cefotaxime, moxifloxacin and lavofloxacin were all more than 80% and among the three, moxifloxacin was the most efficient (RR=1.08, 95%CI 1.02 to 1.13, P=0.004). Meropenem had an efficiency of 90%, a bacterial clearance rate of 83.3% and an incidence of 3.33% as to adverse reaction that mainly included diarrhea. Conclusion (1) We offer a b recommendation for antibiotics such as amoxicillin, amoxicillin amp; clavulanate potassium, ampicillin/sulbactam, piperacillin/tazobactam, doxycycline, azithromycin, clarithromycin, cefuroxim, ceftriaxone, cefotaxime, lavofloxacin, moxifloxacin, ertapenem, meropenem, imipenem and vancocin. (2) We offer a weak recommendation for penicillin G, ciprofloxacin and erythromycin. (3) We propose that doctor should choose optimal antibiotics based on commonly-seen pathogenic bacteria that cause CAP, local criteria of antibiotic susceptibility, severity of CAP, and risk factors of patients.
Objective To evaluate and select essential medicine for acute gastroenteritis using evidence-based approaches based on the burden of disease for township health centers located in eastern, central and western regions of China. Methods By means of the approaches, criteria, and workflow set up in the second article of this series, we referred to the recommendations of evidence-based or authority guidelines from inside and outside China, collected relevant evidence from domestic clinical studies, and recommended essential medicine based on evidence-based evaluation. Data were analyzed by Review Manager (RevMan) 5.1 and GRADE profiler 3.6 to evaluate quality of evidence. Results (1) Five guidelines were included, two of which were evidence-based. (2) Recommended medicines included eight antidiarrheals (of four classes) and three antemetics. (3) According to WHOEML (2011), NEML (2009), CNF (2010), other guidelines and the quantity and quality of evidence, we offered a weak recommendation for ondansetron, metoclopramide, smectite, racecadotril and loperamide applied in the treatment of acute gastroenteritis. We made a recommendation against antibiotics, dexamethasone, kaolin-pectin, activated charcoal, attapulgite and bismuth subsalicylate. (4) Evidence from domestic studies: a result of 14 CCTs (n=1 635, low quality) indicated that in the significant efficiency and total efficiency, smectite (smecta) was superior to routine liquid infusion, norfloxacin, gentamicin or furaxone. Among these 14 CCTs, two CCTs reported smectite (smecta) caused nausea and vomiting (three cases); one CCT reported pain and distention in the abdomen (one case) and general discomfort (one case); and the rest reported no adverse reaction. A result of 10 CCTs (n=1 017, low quality) indicated that for acute diarrhea, racecadotril was superior to routine treatment in the significant efficiency (OR=2.55, 95%CI 1.64 to 3.94, Plt;0.01) and total efficiency (OR=4.32, 95%CI 2.96 to 6.30, Plt;0.01). A result of two CCTs (n=344, low quality) indicated that racecadotril was superior to smectite in the total efficiency in treating acute diarrhea. A result of two CCTs (n=1 056, low quality) indicated that racecadotril was superior to routine treatment in the total efficiency in treating acute adult diarrhea (OR=5.19, 95%CI 3.54 to 7.63, Plt;0.01). A result of two CCTs (n=182, low quality) reported children presented with nausea (two cases). A result of one CCT (n=947, low quality) reported adults presented with constipation (fifteen cases), anorexia (four cases), headache (nine cases) and abdominal pain (one case). Conclusion For acute gastroentitis, we offer a weak recommendation for smectite (powder, for oral use) used in adults (once 3 g, tid., mixed with warm water before intake), child under one year of age (3 g daily, bid.), and child above one year of age (once 3 g, qd. or bid.). Retention enema could be appiled to children with acute gastroenteritis. We also offer a weak recommendation for racecadotril (capsule) used in adults (one capsule, tid., taken continuously less than seven days). Due to the lack of evidence from clinical trials, we make a recommendation against racecadotril applied to women with pregnancy and lactation or children. In order to produce high-quality local evidence, we propose that (1) Further clinical studies should be standardized in diagnosis and criteria. (2) The design and implementation quality of clinical studies should be improved. (3) Original studies on pharmacoeconomic studies and drug applicability are needed.
Objective To evaluate and select essential medicine for urolithiasis using evidence-based methods based on the burden of disease. Methods By means of the approaches, criteria, and workflow set up in the second article of this series, we referred to the recommendations of evidence-based or authority guidelines from inside and outside China, collected relevant evidence from domestic clinical studies, and recommended essential medicine based on evidence-based evaluation. Data were analyzed by Review Manager (RevMan) 5.1 and GRADE profiler 3.6 to evaluate quality of evidence. Results (1) Three evidence-based guidelines were included. Based on WHOEML (2011), NEML (2009), CNF (2010) and the quantity and quality of evidence, we made a recommendation for diclofenac sodium, nifedipine, allopurinol and ibuprofen used in symptomatic treatment of urolithiasis. (3) Results of domestic studies (including four RCTs, n=566; two observational studies, n=96) indicated that calculus-removed rates of diclofenac sodium, nifedipine and allopurinol were 91.5%, 86.4%~93.3% and 86.4% respectively with significant differences. Diclofenac sodium daily cost 7.00 to 8.57 yuan, nifedipine 1.48 to 4.44 yuan, and allopurinol 0.24 to 0.82 yuan. Ibuprofen had a total efficiency of 94.5% with a significant difference for alleviating renal colic, which cost 0.11 yuan daily. Four recommended medicines with safety, clinical efficacy, high economical efficiency and applicability had been marketed with specifications and dosage forms corresponding to guidelines in China. Conclusion For urolithiasis: (1) We offer a b recommendation for diclofenac sodium (capsule/tablet, 50 mg×24, or 25 mg×24) which is contradicted in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding and in pregnant women or women with planned pregnancy. (2) We offer a weak recommendation for nifedipine (tablet/capsule, 10 mg×100 or 10 mg×60) which is contraindicated in dialysis-receiving patients with malignant hypertension and should be cautiously used in patients with irreversible renal failure. (3) We offer a weak recommend allopurinol (tablet, 100 mg×100) which is contraindicated in patients with allergic reaction, severe insufficiency of the liver or kidney, or significant lack of blood cells. (4) We offer a b recommendation for ibuprofen (tablet, 20 mg×20) which is contraindicated in patients with allergic reaction to aspirin.