Has the Volume-Based Drug Purchasing Approach Achieved Equilibrium among Various Stakeholders? Evidence from China.

Volume-based drug purchasing by China's health insurance system currently represents the largest group purchasing organization worldwide. After exchanging the market that accounted for nearly half of the volume of the healthcare system for the ultra-low-price supply of limited drugs, what are the effects on patient and funding burdens, drug accessibility, and clinical efficacy? We aimed to verify the effectiveness of the policy, explore the reasons behind the problem and identify regulatory priorities and collaborative measures. We used literature and reported data from 2019 to 2021 to conduct a stakeholder analysis and health impact assessment, presenting the benefit and risk share for various dimensions. The analysis method was a multidimensional scaling model, which visualized problematic associations. Seventy-nine papers (61 publications and 18 other resources) were included in the study, with 22 effects and 36 problems identified. The results indicated favorable affordability and poor accessibility of drugs, as well as high risk of reduced drug quality and drug-use rationality. The drug-use demand of patients was guaranteed; the prescription rights of doctors regarding clinical drug use were limited; unreasonable evaluation indicators limited the transformation of public hospitals to value- and service-oriented organizations; the sustainability of health insurance funds and policy promotion were at risk; and innovation by pharmaceutical companies was accelerated. The problems associated with high co-occurrence frequencies were divided into the following clusters: cost control, drug accessibility, system rationality, policy fairness, drug quality, and moral hazards. These findings suggested that China has achieved short-term success in reducing the burden on patients and reducing fund expenditure. However, there were still deficiencies in guaranteed supply, quality control, and efficacy tracking. The study offers critical lessons for China and other low- and middle-income countries.