Xinping Zhang

The impact of the National Essential Medicines Policy on prescribing behaviours in primary care facilities in Hubei province of China

AIM To assess the impact of the National Essential Medicines Policy (NEMP) on the use of medicines in government-owned primary care institutions in Hubei province of China. STUDY DESIGN Quasi-experimental design and time-trend analysis. METHODS A systematic random sampling strategy was employed to select 55,800 prescriptions from 18 primary care organizations who progressively implemented the NEMP from January 2009 to July 2011. We examined the change of patterns of prescriptions. The facilities that implemented the NEMP at a later stage served as control. RESULTS An immediate increased uptake of essential medicines of all drugs prescribed which ultimately neared 95%. In total, 38,151 prescriptions (68%) involved antibiotics, and we found no evidence of reduction after the NEMP interventions. A high percentage (59-66%) of prescription drugs were administered through parenteral routes and no reduction was found after the NEMP interventions. Although the average number of medicines per prescription remained unchanged (nearly four), the average cost per prescription declined significantly after the NEMP interventions (¥ 44.67 vs ¥ 26.67 CNY, P < 0.03). CONCLUSIONS The NEMP interventions reduced the average cost per prescription; however, the irrational use of antibiotics and unnecessary parenteral administration remains prevalent. The goals of the NEMP are partially achieved; we therefore recommend a strategic approach involving all stakeholders to comprehensively achieve all aspirations.

National Essential Medicines List and policy practice: A case study of China’s health care reform

BackgroundIn 2009, China implemented the national essential medicines system by enacting the National Essential Medicines List 2009. According to the policy of this system, primary health care institutions can only stock and use essential medicines on the prescribed List. Meanwhile, each province can choose to make its own list of supplemented medicines. The goal of the study is to provide suggestions for emerging problems and identify future policy-making trends.MethodsIn this study, we statistically analyzed the National Essential Medicines List 2009 and lists of supplemented medicines of all 29 provinces. We also examined the rationality of such medicines based on the DELPHI method and literature review, after which we studied the provincial supplements in relation to the national essential medicines system.ResultsWe demonstrated that the National Essential Medicines List 2009 provides a comprehensive coverage of diseases as well as reasonable varieties of drugs for their treatment. The average number of supplemented medicines in 29 provinces is 207, with each medicine included in 2.9 provincial lists on average. Only 2.6% supplemented medicines are included by more than half of the provinces (>15), indicating great regional variance. Among the 32 most frequently supplemented medicines, only 18 meet the selection principles, including two with strict usage restrictions.ConclusionThe structure and selection of the National Essential Medicines List 2009 are relatively reasonable. The main problems, however, include the excessive and non-scientific selection of medicines on the supplemented medicines list. The function of the provincial lists of supplemented medicines has not been achieved, which has influenced the effectiveness of the national essential medicines system in China.

Analysis of government investment in primary healthcare institutions to promote equity during the three-year health reform program in China.

BackgroundThe World Health Report 2000 stated that increased public financing for healthcare was an integral part of the efforts to achieve equity of access. In 2009, the Chinese government launched a three-year health reform program to achieve equity of access. Through this reform program, the government intended to increase its investment in primary healthcare institutions (PHIs). However, reports about the outcome and the improvement of the equity of access have yet to be presented.MethodsStratified sampling was employed in this research. The samples used for the study comprised 34 community health service centers (CHSCs) and 92 township hospitals (THs) from six provinces of China. Collected data, which were publicly available, consisted of the total revenue, financial revenue, and the number of people for the periods covering January 2010 to September 2010 and January 2011 to September 2011. Revenue information for 2009 and 2010 was obtained from China’s Health Statistics Yearbook.By using indicators such as government investment, government finance proportion and per capita revenue, t-tests for paired and independent samples were used to analyze the changes in government investment.ResultsGovernment invest large amount of money to the primary healthcare institutions. Government finance proportion in 2008 was 18.2%. This percentage increased to 38.84% in 2011, indicating statistical significance (p = 0.000) between 2010 and 2011. The per capita financial input was 20.92 yuan in 2010 and 31.10 yuan in 2011. Compared with the figures from 2008 to 2010, the gap in different health sectors narrowed in 2011, and differences emerged. The government finance proportion in CHSCs revenue was 6.9% higher than that of THs, while the per capita revenue of CHSCs was higher. In 2011, the highest and lowest government finance proportions were 48.80% (Shaanxi) and 19.36% (Shandong), respectively. In that same year, the per capita revenue of Shaanxi (40.69 Yuan) was higher than that of Liaoning (28.79 Yuan). Comparing the 2011 figures with those from 2008 to 2010, the gap in 2011 clearly narrowed.ConclusionIn the three-year health reform program, the Chinese government increased its investment to PHIs gradually and significantly. Thus promote equity to access and universal coverage. However, the increase in government investment stemmed from political desire and from the lack of institutionalization of practice and experience. Hence, a mode of financial allocation must be formulated to promote consistency in government input after the three-year health reform program.

Public reporting improves antibiotic prescribing for upper respiratory tract infections in primary care: a matched-pair cluster-randomized trial in China

BackgroundInappropriate use and overuse of antibiotics is a serious concern in the treatment of upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs), especially in developing countries. In recent decades, information disclosure and public reporting (PR) has become an instrument for encouraging good practice in healthcare. This study evaluated the impact of PR on antibiotic prescribing for URTIs in a sample of primary care institutions in China.MethodsA matched-pair cluster-randomized trial was undertaken in QJ city, with 20 primary care institutions participating in the trial. Participating institutions were matched into pairs before being randomly assigned into a control and an intervention group. Prescription statistics were disclosed to patients, health authorities, and health workers monthly within the intervention group, starting from October 2013. Outpatient prescriptions for URTIs were collected from both groups before (1st March to 31st May, 2013) and after the intervention (1st March to 31st May, 2014). A total of 34,815 URTI prescriptions were included in a difference-in-difference analysis using multivariate linear or logistic regression models, controlling for patient attributes as well as institutional characteristics.ResultsOverall, 90% URTI prescriptions required antibiotics and 21% required combined use of antibiotics. More than 77% of URTI prescriptions required intravenous (IV) injection or infusion of drugs. PR resulted in a 9 percentage point (95% CI -17 to -1) reduction in the use of oral antibiotics (adjusted RR =39%, P =0.027), while the use of injectable antibiotics remained unchanged. PR led to a 7 percentage point reduction (95% CI -14 to 0; adjusted RR =36%) in combined use of antibiotics (P =0.049), which was largely driven by a significant reduction in male patients (-7.5%, 95% CI -14 to -1, P =0.03). The intervention had little impact on the use of IV injections or infusions, or the total prescription expenditure.ConclusionsThe results suggest that PR could improve prescribing practices in terms of reducing oral antibiotics and combined use of antibiotics; however, the impacts were limited. We suggest that PR would probably be enhanced by provider payment reform, management and training for providers, and health education for patients.

Application of propensity scores to estimate the association between government subsidy and injection use in primary health care institutions in China

BackgroundThe problem posed by therapeutic injection is a clinical practice issue that influences health care quality and patient safety. Although sufficient government subsidy was one of the 12 key interventions to promote rational drug use initiated by WHO (World Health Organization), limited information is available about the association between government subsidy and injection use in primary health care institutions. In 2009, National Essential Medicines System (NEMS) was implemented in China. The subsidy policy plays an important role in maintaining primary health care institutions. This study explores the impact of government subsidies on the injection use in primary health care institutions in China.Methods126 primary health institutions were included in this study. Institutions were divided into two groups (intervention and control groups) according to the median GS (General subsidy per personnel). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize the observed covariate differences in the characteristics of the primary institutions between the two groups. Kappa score was calculated to determine the consistency between the groups. Paired chi-square test and Relative Risk (RR) were calculated to compare the differences in injection use between the groups.ResultsAmong all the investigated prescriptions, the overall percent of people who received an injection prescribed was 36.96% (n = 12600). PSM showed no significant covariate difference among the 34 groups obtained through this analysis. Kappa score (k = −0.082, p = 0.558) indicated an inconsistency between groups and paired chi-square test revealed a significant difference (p < 0.05) in injection use between the two groups. Relative Risk = 0.679 (95%CI [0.485, 0.950]) indicate that high General subsidy per personnel is a protective factor for primary health care institutions to prescribe injections properly. The intervention group obtained a higher possibility of using injection properly.ConclusionsThe overall effect of government subsidy on the use of injection was positively significant. However, the mechanism by which government subsidy influence injection administration remains unclear, and thus requires further study.

Effects of China’s National Essential Medicines Policy on the Use of Injection in Primary Health Facilities

SummaryThe overuse of injection exists more than 20 years since economic reform in China. It is a persistent problem and seems becoming a new challenge in the new health reform period. This study was designed to assess the effect of national essential medicines policy (NEMP) on injection use at primary health facilities in China by investigating their prescription information. Questionnaires were designed and disseminated to collect empirical data on injection use at 120 primary health facilities in 6 provinces from January to September in 2010 and 2011. The injection use was measured as the indicator as the percentage of prescriptions with one or more injections. The results showed that the percentage of prescriptions with one or more injections was decreased from 38.91% to 36.82% (χ2=11.158, P=0.001) in the all survey areas during the NEMP reform. The difference in level of the injection use in 2011 was significant among the eastern, central and western regions (χ2=223.584, P=0.000); level of the injection use in western region was the lowest (27.73%), while that in the central region was the highest (43.10%). The level of the injection use in 2011 among different provinces was also of great difference (26.00%–58.25%, range: 32.25%). The level of the injection use in 2011 was still much higher than the standard suggested by WHO for developing countries (13.4%–24.1%). It was concluded that NEMP has improved injection use in China, but the injection abuse situation remains serious, indicating that one of the priorities to the next stage of NEMP is to promote the rational use of drugs, especially the injection use.The overuse of injection exists more than 20 years since economic reform in China. It is a persistent problem and seems becoming a new challenge in the new health reform period. This study was designed to assess the effect of national essential medicines policy (NEMP) on injection use at primary health facilities in China by investigating their prescription information. Questionnaires were designed and disseminated to collect empirical data on injection use at 120 primary health facilities in 6 provinces from January to September in 2010 and 2011. The injection use was measured as the indicator as the percentage of prescriptions with one or more injections. The results showed that the percentage of prescriptions with one or more injections was decreased from 38.91% to 36.82% (χ 2=11.158, P=0.001) in the all survey areas during the NEMP reform. The difference in level of the injection use in 2011 was significant among the eastern, central and western regions (χ 2=223.584, P=0.000); level of the injection use in western region was the lowest (27.73%), while that in the central region was the highest (43.10%). The level of the injection use in 2011 among different provinces was also of great difference (26.00%–58.25%, range: 32.25%). The level of the injection use in 2011 was still much higher than the standard suggested by WHO for developing countries (13.4%–24.1%). It was concluded that NEMP has improved injection use in China, but the injection abuse situation remains serious, indicating that one of the priorities to the next stage of NEMP is to promote the rational use of drugs, especially the injection use.

Effect of publicly reporting performance data of medicine use on injection use: a quasi-experimental study.

Background Inappropriate use of prescribing pharmaceuticals, particularly injections, not only affects the quality of medical care, but also leads to an increase in medical expenses. Publicly reporting performance data of medical care is becoming a common health policy tool adopted to supervise medical quality. To our knowledge, few studies about public reporting applied to medicine use have been reported. This study intended to introduce public reporting in the field of medicine use, and evaluate the effect of publicly reporting performance data of medicine use on the use of injections. Methods The research sites were 20 primary healthcare institutions in Q City, Hubei. By matching, the institutions were divided into the intervention group and control group. A quasi-experimental design was applied in this study. In the intervention group, the performance data of medicine use were publicly reported. The injection prescribing rates of the two groups before and after intervention were measured and compared. Difference-in-difference method and logistic regression were employed to estimate the effect of public reporting on injection use. Results Public reporting led to a reduction of approximately 4% in the injection prescribing rate four months after intervention (OR = 0.96; 95%CI: 0.94, 0.97). The intervention effect was inconsistent in each month after intervention, and it was most positive in the second month after intervention (OR = 0.90; 95%CI: 0.89, 0.92). Conclusions In general, publicly reporting performance data of medicine use may have positive effects on injection use to some extent. Further research is needed to investigate the mechanism by which public reporting influences injection use. Comprehensive measures are also necessary to promote the rational use of injections.

Evaluation of the effects of comprehensive reform on primary healthcare institutions in Anhui Province

BackgroundIn 2009, the Chinese Central Communist Party and the China State Council started to implement comprehensive healthcare reforms. The first round of reforms, involving Anhui province, was from 2009 to 2011, and focused on primary healthcare institutions. This study conducts an initial assessment of the effects of specific parts of the reforms in Anhui.MethodsMixed quantitative and qualitative methods were adopted for data collection. Seven hundred and three health institutions from 15 counties were randomly chosen. The practices, development, effects, problems, and other relevant information related to the reform were classified into four aspects: medicine management; personnel systems and income distribution mechanisms; compensation mechanisms for primary healthcare institutions; and strengthening the primary healthcare system. The effects of reform were analyzed by evaluating changes in compensation channels, visit costs, diagnosis and treatment structure, hardware, structures, efficiency, and behavior.ResultsA new system for authorizing drugs resulted in a total of 857 new drugs being accessible at agreed prices through primary healthcare institutions in Anhui. The cost of the average outpatient visit decreased from 35.29 RMB to 31.64 RMB, although for inpatients, the average cost increased from 799.05 RMB to 992.60 RMB. The number of healthcare personnel decreased, but their workloads increased. The total revenue from government sources increased by 41.09%, and the proportion of revenue from drugs decreased by 25.19%. The rate of diagnosis and treatment visits and outpatient visits to primary healthcare institutions increased. Finally, between 2008 and 2010, 1,195 standardized township hospitals, 14,134 village clinics, and 1,234 community health service institutions were constructed.ConclusionThe reform of primary healthcare institutions in Anhui has improved the personnel structures surrounding frontline healthcare workers, increased their incomes, improved work efficiency, and changed the compensation patterns of primary healthcare institutions, improved hardware, reduced drug prices, and, to some extent, improved the diagnosis and treatment structure. However, the reforms have not radically changed the behavior of medical workers or the visit patterns of patients. Approaches such as strengthening performance evaluation, and carrying out initiatives to further mobilize frontline healthcare workers, enhance rational drug use through improved training and educate patients, should be undertaken in the future.

Public reporting as a prescriptions quality improvement measure in primary care settings in China: variations in effects associated with diagnoses

The overprovision and irrational use of antibiotics and injections are a major public health concern. Public reporting has been adopted as a strategy to encourage good prescribing practices. This study evaluated the effects of public reporting on antibiotic and injection prescriptions in urban and rural primary care settings in Hubei province, China. A randomized control trial was conducted, with 10 primary care institutions being subject to public reporting and another 10 serving as controls. Prescription indicators were publicly reported monthly over a one-year period. Prescriptions for bronchitis, gastritis and hypertension before and after the intervention were collected. Difference-in-difference tests were performed to estimate the effect size of the intervention on five prescription indicators: percentage of prescriptions containing antibiotics; percentage of prescriptions containing two or more antibiotics; percentage of prescriptions containing injections; percentage of prescriptions containing antibiotic injections; and average prescription cost. Public reporting had varied effects on prescriptions for different diagnoses. It reduced antibiotic prescribing for gastritis. Prescriptions containing injections, especially antibiotic injections, also declined, but only for gastritis. A reduction of prescription costs was noted for bronchitis and gastritis. Public reporting has the potential to encourage good prescribing practices. Its effects vary with different disease conditions.

Does public reporting influence antibiotic and injection prescribing to all patients? A cluster-randomized matched-pair trial in china.

AbstractThe inappropriate use and overuse of antibiotics and injections are serious threats to global population, and the public reporting of health care performance (PRHCP) has been an important instrument for improving the quality of care. However, existing evidence shows a mixed effect of PRHCP. This study is to explore the potential effectiveness of PRHCP that contributes to the convincing evidence of health policy and reform.This study was undertaken in Qian Jiang City, applying a matched-pair cluster-randomized trial. Twenty primary care institutions were treated as clusters and were matched into 10 pairs. Clusters in each pair were randomly assigned into a control or an intervention group. Physicians’ prescribing information was publicly reported to patients and physicians monthly in the intervention group from October 2013. A total of 748,632 outpatient prescriptions were included for difference-in-difference (DID) regression model and subgroups (SGs) analysis.Overall, PRHCP intervention led to a slight reduction in the use of combined antibiotics (odds ratio [OR] = 0.870, P < 0.001) and slowed the average expenditure increase of patients (coefficient = −0.051, P < 0.001). SG analysis showed the effect of PRHCP varied among patients with different characteristics. PRHCP decreased the probability of prescriptions requiring antibiotics, combined antibiotics, and injections of patients aged 18 to 64 years old (OR < 1), and all results were statistically significant. By contrast, the results of elderly and minor patients with health insurance showed that PRHCP increased their probability of prescriptions requiring antibiotics and injections. PRHCP slowed the increase of average expenditure of most SGs.PRHCP intervention can influence the prescribing pattern of physicians. Patient factors such as age and health insurance influence the effect of PRHCP intervention, which imply that PRHCP should be designed for different patients. Patient education, aiming at radically changing attitudes toward antibiotics and injections, should be taken to promote the effectiveness of public reporting in China.