Search

Abstract It is unclear whether Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and greenness have additional modifying effects on the association between air pollution and respiratory system disease. Utilizing a time‐stratified case‐crossover design with a distributed lag linear model, we analyzed the association between six pollutants (PM2.5, PM10, NO2, SO2, O3, and CO) and 555,498 respiratory hospital admissions in Beijing from 1st January 2016 to 31st December 2019. We employed conditional logistic regression, adjusting for meteorological conditions, holidays and influenza, to calculate percent change of hospitalization risk. Subsequently, we performed subgroup analysis to investigate potential effect modifications using a two‐sample z test. Every 10 μg/m3 increase in PM2.5, PM10, NO2, SO2, and O3 led to increases of 0.26% (95%CI: 0.17%, 0.35%), 0.15% (95%CI: 0.09%, 0.22%), 0.61% (95%CI: 0.44%, 0.77%), 1.72% (95%CI: 1.24%, 2.21%), and 0.32% (95%CI: 0.20%, 0.43%) in admissions, respectively. Also, a 1 mg/m3 increase in CO levels resulted in a 2.50% (95%CI: 1.96%, 3.04%) rise in admissions. The links with NO2 (p

ObjectiveTo curb the unreasonable growth of pharmaceutical expenditures, Beijing implemented the zero markup drug policy (ZMDP) in public hospitals in 2017, which focused on separating drug sales from hospital revenue. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impacts of ZMDP on healthcare expenditures and utilization for inpatients.MethodsThe Beijing claims data of inpatients diagnosed with ischemic heart disease (IHD), chronic renal failure (CRF), and lung cancer (LC) was extracted from the China Health Insurance Research Association (CHIRA) database. The study employed an interrupted time series to evaluate the impacts of ZMDP on healthcare expenditures and utilization.ResultsThe changes in total hospitalization expenses, health insurance expenses, and out-of-pocket expenses were not statistically significant neither in level change nor in trend change for inpatients diagnosed with IHD, CRF, or LC after implementing ZMDP (all P > 0.05). The Western medicine expenses for the treatment of inpatients diagnosed with IHD significantly decreased by 1,923.38 CNY after the reform (P < 0.05). The Chinese medicine expenses of inpatients diagnosed with CRF instantaneously increased by 1,344.89 CNY (P < 0.05). The service expenses of inpatients diagnosed with IHD and LC instantaneously increased by 756.52 CNY (p > 0.05) and 2,629.19 CNY (p < 0.05), respectively. However, there were no significant changes (P > 0.05) in out-of-pocket expenses, medical consumables, imaging, and laboratory test expenses of inpatients diagnosed with IHD, CRF, or LC. The initiation of the intervention immediately increased the number of inpatient admissions with LC by 2.293 per month (p < 0.05).ConclusionsThe ZMDP was effective in reducing drug costs, and the effects on healthcare utilization varied across diseases type. However, the increase in medical service and Chinese medicine expenses diminished the effect of containing healthcare expenses and relieving the financial burdens of patients. Policymakers are advised to take multiple and long-lasting measures, such as provider payment methods reform, volume-based drug procurement, and drug price negotiation to improve the affordability of patients thoroughly.

ObjectiveThis study aimed to determine the efficacy, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines (CoronaVac and BBIBP-CorV) in China using existing international clinical trials and real-world evidence.MethodsThrough a search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CNKI, studies investigating the effectiveness of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines were identified, and a meta-analysis was undertaken to synthesize the vaccine efficacy and effectiveness data. Moreover, a decision-analytic model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of inactivated vaccines for combating the COVID-19 pandemic in the Chinese context from a societal perspective. Results of the meta-analysis, along with cost data from official websites and works of literature were used to populate the model. Sensitivity analysis was performed to test the robustness of the model results.ResultsA total of 24 studies were included in the meta-analysis. In comparison to no immunization, the effectiveness of inactivated vaccine against COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, ICU admission and death were 65.18% (95% CI 62.62, 67.75), 79.10% (95% CI 71.69, 86.51), 90.46% (95% CI 89.42, 91.50), and 86.69% (95% CI 85.68, 87.70); and the efficacy against COVID-19 infection and hospitalization were 70.56% (95% CI 57.87, 83.24) and 100% (95% CI 61.72, 100). Inactivated vaccine vaccination prevented more infections, hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and deaths with lower total costs, thus was cost-saving from a societal perspective in China. Base-case analysis results were robust in the one-way sensitivity analysis, and the percentage of ICU admission or death and direct medical cost ranked the top influential factors in our models. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, vaccination had a 100% probability of being cost-effective.ConclusionInactivated vaccine is effective in preventing COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, ICU admission and avoiding COVID-19 related death, and COVID-19 vaccination program is cost-saving from societal perspective in China.

To effectively prevent and control the COVID-19 pandemic, countries have adopted a booster vaccination strategy. This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of sequential booster COVID-19 vaccination compared to two-dose inactivated vaccination in China from a societal perspective. A Markov model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of sequential vaccination, including two doses of an inactivated vaccine followed by a booster shot of an inactivated vaccine, adenovirus vectored vaccine, protein subunit vaccine, or mRNA vaccine. The incremental effects of a booster shot with an inactivated vaccine, protein subunit vaccine, adenovirus vectored vaccine, and mRNA vaccine were 0.0075, 0.0110, 0.0208, and 0.0249 QALYs and saved costs of US$163.96, US$261.73, US$583.21, and US$724.49, respectively. Under the Omicron virus pandemic, the sequential vaccination among adults and the elderly (aged 60–69, 70–79, over 80) was consistently cost-saving, and a booster shot of the mRNA vaccine was more cost-saving. The results indicate that the sequential vaccination strategy is cost-effective in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic, and improving vaccination coverage among the elderly is of great importance in avoiding severe cases and deaths.