Search

Aims: This study aimed to systematically compare the effectiveness, safety, and costs of different anti‐Parkinson drugs (APDs). Methods: This is a multi‐center study that retrospectively analyzed the data of 8420 outpatients with PD from 2014 to 2019 across 30 tertiary hospitals in China. The effectiveness was evaluated by changes in total dosages of APDs, normalized by levodopa equivalent dose (LED) and presented as ΔLEDs; levodopa equivalent dose cost (LEDc) represented the daily cost of APDs; and newly added diagnostics were represented as APDs‐related adverse events. Results: A total of 384 patients with eligible medical records for three consecutive years were enrolled. Patients treated with carbidopa/levodopa or levodopa/benserazide had significantly lower mean ΔLEDs than other groups (p < 0.01), followed by pramipexole and selegiline. The piribedil group had the highest ΔLEDs, with mean differences of 112.56–355.04 mg compared to other groups (p < 0.01). Meanwhile, LEDc in the levodopa/benserazide, carbidopa/levodopa, and piribedil groups were significantly lower than those in pramipexole or selegiline groups ($0.088–0.135/day for levodopa/benserazide; $0.070–0.126/day for carbidopa/levodopa; $0.112–0.138/day for piribedil; $0.290–0.332/day for pramipexole; $0.229–0.544/day for selegiline; p < 0.01). Patients with piribedil had more adverse events, with an incidence rate of 35.7%, followed by levodopa/benserazide (25.6%), selegiline (23.5%), carbidopa/levodopa (23.3%), and pramipexole (16.4%). Pramipexole showed a lower incidence rate of adverse events than piribedil, including neuropsychiatric symptoms (p = 0.006), headache/dizziness (p = 0.016), and gastrointestinal symptoms (p = 0.031). Conclusions: Carbidopa/levodopa or levodopa/benserazide might exhibit better clinical improvement with less medical cost, while piribedil presented less clinical improvement but a higher risk of headache/dizziness, gastrointestinal, and neuropsychiatric symptoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. As part of the efforts to build a practical, effective, and diversified medical insurance payment method, it is crucial for China to deepen the reform of ambulatory patient groups (APGs). This study was aimed to explore the mechanism and effect of this policy from three dimensions, including medical expenses, medical insurance funds, and medical services. Methods. In 2020, China's pilot reform of APG was initiated in Jinhua City, Zhejiang Province. Descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and OLS regression analysis were utilized to evaluate the effect of the APG reform in Jinhua. Results. The implementation of the reform can contribute significantly to establishing a comprehensive medical service governance mechanism of classified settlement and coordinated promotion. It also plays a critical role in safeguarding people's lives and health by promoting the high-level development of medical insurance systems and public hospitals, optimizing the quality of medical services, and improving the efficiency of medical insurance funds. Conclusion. Through the lens of policy evaluation, our findings can provide useful experience for the implementation of the outpatient medical insurance payment method in developing countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]