Discount rate setting and adjustment in international pharmacoeconomic evaluation guidelines
- VernacularTitle:国际药物经济学评价指南中贴现率设定与调整
- Author:
Yiwei LI
1
;
Jingbo ZHANG
1
;
Huiwen YANG
1
;
Hanfei WANG
1
;
Yusi SUO
1
;
Han WANG
1
;
Zhien GU
1
;
Xuejing JIN
1
Author Information
1. Evidence-based Medicine Center，School of Traditional Chinese Medicine，Beijing University of Chinese Medicine，Beijing 100029，China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
pharmacoeconomic evaluation;
guidelines
- From:
China Pharmacy
2025;36(20):2542-2547
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE To provide direction and reference for the adjustment of the discount rate （DR） in China’s pharmacoeconomic guidelines. METHODS Search was conducted on the official websites of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research， health technology assessment agencies in various countries/regions， as well as relevant websites of other upper-middle-income or high-income countries/regions. The recommended DR， adjustment trends， and setting rationales in pharmacoeconomic evaluation guidelines across different countries/regions were then summarized and compared. Based on theoretical derivation and literature analysis， the effects of different DR on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio （ICER） were examined. RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS Among the 40 included guidelines， the base-case DR ranged from 1.5% to 5%， with 5% being the most common value； the range for sensitivity analysis was 0 to 12%. Thirty-six countries/regions applied the same DR to both costs and health outcomes， while in the Netherlands， Belgium， Poland and Czech Republic， DR for costs was higher than for health outcomes. In recent years， Korea， France and Ireland had lowered their DR in response to economic changes， whereas the Netherlands and Czech Republic had raised their DR for cost. The setting of the DR was primarily based on the public project investment interest rate or referred to recommendations from internationally authoritative institutions and other relevant guidelines. The direction and magnitude of the impact of different DR on the ICER largely depended on the distribution of costs and health outcomes between the intervention and reference measure. The setting and adjustment of DR were closely associated with the economic environment. Based on international experience, the DR in China can be lowered by 0.5% to 1.5%， and localized empirical research can be conducted using internationally common estimation methods.
