Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23813440›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics2014

Does economic incentive matter for rational use of medicine? China's experience from the essential medicines program.

Mingsheng Chen, Lijie Wang, Wen Chen, Luying Zhang, Hongli Jiang, Wenhui Mao

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Antibiotic Sales in Primary Care in Hubei Province, China: An Analysis of 2012-2017 Procurement Records.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The Main Factors of Induced Demand for Medicine Prescription: A Qualitative Study.Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR · 2019
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Mingsheng ChenDepartment of Health Economics, School of Public Health, Fudan University, 138 Yi Xue Yuan Road, P.O. Box 187, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China, cms123@foxmail.com.
Lijie Wang
Wen Chen
Luying Zhang
Hongli Jiang
Wenhui Mao

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBefore the new round of healthcare reform in China, primary healthcare providers could obtain a fixed 15 % or greater mark-up of profits by prescribing and selling medicines. There were concerns that this perverse incentive was a key cause of irrational medicine use. China's new Essential Medicines Program (EMP) was launched in 2009 as part of the national health sector reform initiatives. One of its core policies was to eliminate primary care providers' economic incentives to overprescribe or prescribe unnecessarily expensive drugs, which were regarded as consequences of China's traditional financing system for health institutions.

objectivesThe objective of the study was to measure changes in prescribing patterns in primary healthcare facilities after the removal of the economic incentives for physicians to overprescribe as a result of the implementation of the EMP.

methodsA comparison design was applied to 8,258 prescriptions in 2007 and 8,278 prescriptions in 2010, from 83 primary healthcare facilities nationwide. Indicators were adopted to evaluate medicine utilization, which included overall number of medicines, average number of Western and traditional Chinese medicines, pharmaceutical expenditure per outpatient prescription, and proportion of prescriptions that contained two or more antibiotics. We further assessed the use of medicines (antibiotics, infusion, hormones, and intravenous injection) per disease-specific prescription for hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery heart disease, bronchitis, upper respiratory tract infection, and gastritis. A difference-in-difference analysis was employed to evaluate the net policy effect.

resultsOverall changes in indicators were not found to be statistically significant between the 2 years. The results varied for different diseases. The number of Western drugs per outpatient prescription decreased while that of traditional Chinese medicines increased. Overuse of antibiotics remained an extensive problem in the treatment of many diseases, though there was some significant improvement in certain diseases, like diabetes in rural areas. Medicine expenditure per prescription also decreased.

conclusionsIt seems that the removal of a perverse economic incentive alone would not lead to improvement of healthcare providers' prescribing patterns. The rationality of the Essential Medicines List and the lack of payers' and providers' meaningful involvement in the development of the policy possibly contribute to the lack of significant changes in prescribing behaviors. It is suggested that China should adopt more comprehensive policies for healthcare facilities, physicians, patients, and payers, rather than just relying on economic incentives to improve rational use of medicines.

Indexed as

Drug PrescriptionsHealth Care ReformPractice Patterns, Physicians'ChinaDrugs, EssentialDrug Utilization ReviewHealth PolicyDrugs, Essential

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.