ArticleChinese journal of integrative medicine2014
Cost-effectiveness analysis of combined Chinese medicine and Western medicine for ischemic stroke patients.
Article in Chinese journal of integrative medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic Review and Quality Evaluation of Pharmacoeconomic Studies on Traditional Chinese Medicines.Frontiers in public health · 2021Pooled it
- The survival and cost-effectiveness analysis of adjunctive Chinese medicine therapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a nationwide cohort study in Taiwan.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Study on the Effect of Self-Made Lifei Dingchuan Decoction Combined with Western Medicine on Cough Variant Asthma.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of combining Chinese medicine (CM) with Western medicine (WM) for ischemic stroke patients.
methodsHospitalization summary reports between 2006 and 2010 from eight hospitals in Beijing were used to analyze the length of stay (LOS), cost per stay (CPS), and outcomes at discharge.
resultsAmong 12,009 patients (female, 36.44%; mean age, 69.98±13.06 years old), a substantial number of patients were treated by the WM_Chinese patent medicine (CPM)_Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) (38.90%); followed by the WM_CPM (32.55%), the WM (24.26%), and the WM_CHM (4.15%). With adjustment for confounding variables, LOS of the WM_CPM_CHM group was about 10 days longer than that of the WM group, and about 6 days longer than that of the WM_CPM group or the WM_CHM group (P<0.01); CPS of the WM_CPM_CHM group was United States dollar (USD) 1,288 more than that of the WM group, and about USD 600 more than that of the WM_CPM group or the WM_CHM group (P<0.01). Compared with the WM group, odd ratio (OR) of recovered and improved outcome of the WM_CPM_CHM group was the highest [OR: 12.76, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 9.23, 17.64, P<0.01], OR of death outcome of the WM_CPM_CHM group was the lowest (OR: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.05, 0.12, P<0.01). There was no significant difference between LOS, CPS and OR of the WM_CPM group and those of the WM_CHM group (P>0.05). Cost/effectiveness and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the WM_CPM_CHM group were robustly higher than those of the WM group.
conclusionCompared with WM alone, supplementing CPM and CHM to WM provides significant health benefits of improving the chance of recovered and improved outcome, and reducing the death rate, at an expense of longer LOS and higher CPS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25087603What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.