Efficacy，safety and cost-effectiveness of polyisobutylene-type Gutong plaster in the treatment of osteoarthritis in Chinese adults
- VernacularTitle:聚异丁烯型骨通贴膏用于中国成人骨关节炎的有效性、安全性和经济性
- Author:
Tianyu JING
1
;
Chaoyi LIU
1
;
Haijiao LIU
1
;
Gangpeng ZHONG
1
;
Xiaoqing HUANG
1
;
Wei XU
1
Author Information
1. School of International Pharmaceutical Business，China Pharmaceutical University，Nanjing 211198，China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Gutong plaster;
non-steroidal anti-inflamma-
- From:
China Pharmacy
2023;34(12):1478-1482
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy， safety and cost-effectiveness of polyisobutylene （PIB）-type Gutong plaster （called “PIB Gutong plaster” for short） versus non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs （NSAIDs） in the treatment of osteoarthritis in Chinese adults. METHODS Based on a real-world study， after propensity score matching， the decrease in pain visual simulation score， utility increase， time to pain resolution， time to return to normal range of motion and total adverse events of PIB Gutong plaster versus three NSAIDs （celecoxib， diclofenac sodium， and ibuprofen） were evaluated. Cost-utility analysis was used to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio （ICER） of patients using PIB Gutong plaster versus the three NSAIDs from the perspective of the whole society， and sensitivity analysis was carried out. RESULTS In terms of effectiveness， the recovery time of joint activity in PIB Gutong plaster group was significantly longer than that in celecoxib group， the decrease in VAS score of PIB Gutong plaster was significantly higher than that of ibuprofen but significantly lower than that of diclofenac sodium； the time of pain disappearance was longer than that in diclofenac sodium group and ibuprofen group， and the increase in health utility was significantly lower than that in diclofenac sodium group （P＜0.05）. In terms of safety， there were no significant differences in the incidence and severity of adverse events of PIB Gutong plaster， compared with the three NSAIDs， without statistical significance （P＜0.05）. In terms of cost-effectiveness， compared with celecoxib and diclofenac sodium， PIB Gutong plaster was dominant. Compared with ibuprofen， the ICER value of PIB Gutong plaster was 178 611.58 yuan/QALY， indicating that at the current price， PIB Gutong plaster was cost-effective if the threshold was 3 times GDP per capita. The results of sensitivity analysis were consistent with those of basic analysis. CONCLUSIONS The efficacy of PIB Gutong plaster was better than that of ibuprofen， similar to that of celecoxib， but worse than that of diclofenac sodium， the safety was consistent with the three NSAIDs， and the cost-effectiveness of PIB Gutong plaster needs to be improved.
