INTRODUCTION: While traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has a long history and continues to be widely practised, its overall clinical efficacy according to conventional scientific standards remains the topic of ongoing research and exploration. This review focuses on the potential use of acupuncture and Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) in combination with Western medicine in Singapore, based on recently published data on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these TCM treatments. METHOD: We collated and summarised 71 research papers published in the past decade, focusing on randomised controlled trials, systematic reviews and population-based cohort studies that had a total sample size (treatment and control arms) exceeding 60. English-language articles published between 2015 and 2025 were identified by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure. The search strategy included intervention terms like "acupuncture", "Chinese medicine", "TCM", "traditional Chinese medicine", "RCT" and "randomized controlled trial"; economic evaluation terms like "cost" and "cost-effectiveness"; and disease conditions of concern. We narrowed our research to the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of CHM in which either the individual ingredients or the products were listed as Chinese Proprietary Medicines (CPMs). RESULTS: The summary tables demonstrate that the integration of acupuncture and/or CPMs with conventional Western medicine can enhance treatment outcomes across various chronic and non-chronic diseases. Their affordability and preventive focus can contribute to long-term healthcare cost savings, benefiting both patients and the healthcare system as a whole. CONCLUSION With a robust regulatory framework, scientific validation and government support, acupunc-ture and CPMs have an important role in the management of various diseases, especially chronic ones, in Singapore.
Humans ; Singapore ; Medicine, Chinese Traditional/methods* ; Acupuncture Therapy/methods* ; Drugs, Chinese Herbal/economics* ; Cost-Benefit Analysis ; Disease Management

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Oral ivermectin is recommended as an alternative to topical permethrin in Japanese, European, and CDC-STI guidelines for treating classic scabies. The combination of oral ivermectin and topical permethrin is also used in some settings. Partial economic evaluations conducted in India and Egypt have conflicting results, and no cost-effectiveness analysis in the Philippines has compared ivermectin-based regimens to permethrin for scabies treatment. We aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of oral ivermectin, alone or in combination with permethrin, compared to permethrin, in the treatment of Filipino adult patients with classic scabies.

We used a decision tree model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of two regimens, oral ivermectin alone or in combination with permethrin, compared with permethrin to treat adults and children aged five years and older with classic scabies in the outpatient setting from the household perspective in the Philippines. We estimated total costs and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) over a one-month follow-up. Input parameters were obtained from secondary data, such as effect estimates for probabilities of clinical outcomes from a network meta-analysis, DALYs from the Global Burden of Disease 2019, and prevailing market cost in the Philippines (DPRI 2022 with recommended markup by DOH, and leading drugstores) as of August 2022. We computed for incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and net monetary benefit (NMB) to determine which of the interventions are cost-effective. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, and scenario analyses were conducted to assess the impact of parameter and structural uncertainty.

Ivermectin-based regimens are suggested to be likely cost-saving compared to permethrin in the Philippine outpatient setting. Base case analysis showed that oral ivermectin had higher cost-savings (change in cost, -1,039.31; change in DALYS, 0.00027), while combination oral ivermectin/permethrin had higher DALYs averted (change in cost, PhP -1,019.78; change in DALYs, 0.00045), compared to permethrin. Combination oral ivermectin/permethrin (56%) was the most cost-effective, followed by oral ivermectin (44%) compared to permethrin (0%) through probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Estimates for ivermectin were sensitive to risk of cure for ivermectin vs permethrin using 1-way deterministic sensitivity analysis. Oral ivermectin was favored over combination oral ivermectin/permethrin at all thresholds based on the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve.

Both ivermectin-based regimens seem to be cost-saving compared to permethrin in the treatment of classic scabies in the Philippine outpatient setting. Clinicians may consider oral ivermectin, alone or in combination with permethrin as an alternative first-line or second-line treatment depending on patient preference, adverse event risk profile, availability, and economic capacity. This needs to be confirmed using primary data from Filipino patients to enhance the robustness of the findings and support evidence-based local decision-making in different settings. Less uncertainty in modelled parameters can give greater confidence in the results, which can be adopted for budget impact analysis and allow more rational resource allocation. Value of information analysis can be done to determine whether the expense of future RCTs or surveys in Filipinos to collect primary data is worth it. The cost of reducing uncertainty, if deemed worth the cost of further studies, may facilitate population-level decision-making and budget planning. Findings may further inform practice guideline development, coverage decisions, and national control program planning by providing the most cost-effective scabies intervention.

OBJECTIVES

During the early COVID-19 pandemic (2020 to mid-2021), the Philippine government relied on nonpharmaceutical interventions such as lockdowns and Enhanced Community Quarantine (ECQ). With the emergency use authorization of vaccines, assessing their potential impact became essential. This study develops a Philippine model to evaluate the epidemiologic and economic effects of COVID-19 vaccination, estimating its impact on mortality, hospitalization, and mild/asymptomatic cases under various prioritization strategies, including booster doses and the presence of variants of concern.

A dynamic transmission model (DTM) with an SEIR (Susceptible-Exposed-Infected-Recovered) structure was calibrated using local data, including case numbers, deaths, seroprevalence, vaccination coverage, and intervention costs. The model’s outputs informed a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) from health system and societal perspectives over a two-year horizon. Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) were calculated, with costs adjusted to 2020 prices and discount rates of 3%-10% applied. Sensitivity analyses, including one-way and probabilistic approaches, assessed robustness, while a budget impact analysis (BIA) estimated government expenditures in 2020 and 2021.

Without vaccination, daily cases could have peaked at 400,000 between February and May 2021. A vaccination campaign was projected to reduce cases to around 20,000, significantly lowering mortality.  

From the health system perspective, the estimated cost without vaccination was PhP 14.46 trillion, with 93.83 million QALYs. With vaccination, costs dropped to PhP 2.36 trillion, while QALYs increased to 101.79 million. From the societal perspective, costs were PhP 14.68 trillion without vaccination and PhP 2.38 trillion with vaccination, with the same QALY outcomes.

CEA results confirmed that vaccination was cost-saving, with ICERs of -PhP 1,520,727.28 per QALY (health system) and -PhP 1,546,171.63 per QALY (societal). Sensitivity analyses supported these findings, with oneway sensitivity analysis showing minimal impact from parameter changes and probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirming cost-saving outcomes. The BIA estimated government expenditures of PhP 983.45 billion in 2020 and PhP 1.47 trillion in 2021 for the vaccine scenario, lower than the no-vaccine scenario.

Indeed, our modeling has shown that COVID-19 vaccines could mitigate the spread of COVID-19 and provide good value for money.

OBJECTIVES

The burden of oral diseases is high in the Philippines. The global burden of disease study in 2019 estimated that 44 million Filipinos are affected by oral disorder. More specifically, 29 million Filipinos have untreated dental caries. Outpatients' dental health services are not covered by PhilHealth benefit package. There is a need to include key oral health interventions such as basic prevention and treatment in PhilHealth benefit package to be delivered at the primary health care settings (WHO TSA 153980). The study aimed to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of a set of oral health care services to be delivered at different levels of health care within a comprehensive PhilHealth benefit package.

This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of including basic oral health services in the PhilHealth benefit package using a Markov modelling approach. The target population consists of Filipino adults and children at risk for dental diseases who are potential beneficiaries of PhilHealth. The intervention under consideration includes dental consultation, oral prophylaxis, topical fluoride application, silver diamine fluoride application, dental filling, and tooth extraction. The comparator is the current standard of care, which involves out-of-pocket payments for oral health services or limited access to subsidized dental care. The primary outcomes assessed include the incremental costeffectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. A Markov model was constructed with a time horizon of 50 years to simulate the lifespan of Filipinos up to the average life expectancy of 70 years old, using a cycle length of one year to reflect disease progression and treatment effects overtime. Model parameters were derived from literature and expert opinion. Sensitivity analyses, including one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, were conducted to assess uncertainty in model inputs. The analysis was carried out from a societal perspective incorporating direct medical and non-medical costs, and indirect costs.

A Markov model showed that a subsidized package is a cost-effective approach compared to the current situation of no subsidy, with an ICER of PhP 75,636 (1,535.76 USD) per disability adjusted life year (DALY) averted. The computed ICER was considered good value for money as it was below 2021 GDP per capita of the Philippines of PhP 174,286 (3,538.80 USD). One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the cost of preventive treatment had the most significant impact on the model, and a price threshold of greater than PhP 3,062 (62.17 USD) for preventive treatment will render the subsidized package no longer cost-effective. The budget impact analysis showed a 1.63% increase in budget annually with the current situation of no subsidy. Rolling out a subsidized oral health package will entail a significant increase in government expenses during the first year but a decreasing trend of 1-2% annually for the following years as the program takes its effect.

A subsidized oral health package is a costeffective approach from a societal perspective. It will entail a significant increase in government expenditure during the start of its roll out but will eventually result in a decreasing trend of expenses as the years progress.

Correctional facilities are a major hub of hepatitis C virus (HCV), with rates far higher than those observed in the general population. Once considered an intractable crisis, the current situation offers a unique opportunity. The advent of direct-acting antivirals has changed the HCV treatment landscape, making its elimination possible. This review summarises the scientific evidence and progress towards HCV elimination in correctional health systems. It outlines the evolution of 'test-and-treat' models, assesses micro-elimination success worldwide, especially in Singapore, and highlights collaborative efforts between Changi General Hospital and Singapore Prison Services. Their implementation of HCV treatment guidelines serves as a key case study in this context. This review also analyses the various barriers - structural, financial, clinical and logistical - that hinder progress. It consolidates strong evidence that prison-based HCV treatment is cost-effective, promotes health equity, supports the World Health Organization 2030 goals and reduces the societal burden of HCV.
Humans ; Singapore ; Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use* ; Hepatitis C, Chronic/epidemiology* ; Prisons ; Prisoners ; Disease Eradication ; Cost-Benefit Analysis ; Hepacivirus ; Correctional Facilities

BACKGROUND: The FAVOR (Comparison of Quantitative Flow Ratio Guided and Angiography Guided Percutaneous Intervention in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease) III China trial demonstrated that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) lesion selection using quantitative flow ratio (QFR) measurement, a novel angiography-based approach for estimating fractional flow reserve, improved two-year clinical outcomes compared with standard angiography guidance. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of QFR-guided PCI from the perspective of the current Chinese healthcare system. METHODS: This study is a pre-specified analysis of the FAVOR III China trial, which included 3825 patients randomized between December 25, 2018, and January 19, 2020, from 26 centers in China. Patients with stable or unstable angina pectoris or those ≥72 hours post-myocardial infarction who had at least one lesion with a diameter stenosis between 50% and 90% in a coronary artery with a ≥2.5 mm reference vessel diameter by visual assessment were randomized to a QFR-guided strategy or an angiography-guided strategy with 1:1 ratio. During the two-year follow-up, data were collected on clinical outcomes, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), estimated costs of index procedure hospitalization, outpatient cardiovascular medication use, and rehospitalization due to major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). The primary analysis calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) as the cost per MACCE avoided. An ICER of ¥10,000/MACCE event avoided was considered economically attractive in China. RESULTS: At two years, the QFR-guided group demonstrated a reduced rate of MACCE compared to the angiography-guided group (10.8% vs . 14.7%, P <0.01). Total two-year costs were similar between the groups (¥50,803 ± 21,121 vs . ¥50,685 ± 23,495, P = 0.87). The ICER for the QFR-guided strategy was ¥3055 per MACCE avoided, and the probability of QFR being economically attractive was 64% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of ¥10,000/MACCE avoided. Sensitivity analysis showed that QFR-guided PCI would become cost-saving if the cost of QFR were below ¥3682 (current cost: ¥3800). Cost-utility analysis yielded an ICER of ¥56,163 per QALY gained, with a 53% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of ¥85,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing PCI, a QFR-guided strategy appears economically attractive compared to angiographic guidance from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03656848.
Humans ; Cost-Benefit Analysis ; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods* ; Male ; Female ; Coronary Angiography/methods* ; Middle Aged ; Aged ; Coronary Artery Disease/surgery* ; Quality-Adjusted Life Years ; Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial/physiology*

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review examines recent pharmacoeconomic literature on denosumab' cost-effectiveness for bone metastasis treatment, providing evidence-based insights to guide healthcare policy decisions. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed across Cochrane, PubMed, EMBASE (Ovid), CNKI, and Wanfang databases to identify original articles published between 2017 and 2023. Key words consisted of bone metastases, denosumab, and cost-effectiveness in the search strategy. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed utilizing the revised Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS 2022). Data was extracted regarding methodological characteristics and cost-effectiveness analyses. RESULTS: A total of 111 studies were retrieved, of which 6 met the inclusion criteria. All included studies were based on clinical trials and published literature data and exhibited high methodological quality. Up to 83% (5 out of 6) of comparisons demonstrated that denosumab was more cost-effective or dominant compared to zoledronic acid. The adjusted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios varied substantially by tumor type, ranging from CZK 436,339.09 to USD 136,234 per skeletal-related event avoided and from CZK 61,580.95 to USD 118,392.11 per quality-adjusted life year gained. CONCLUSIONS The majority of the included studies support denosumab as a more cost-effective treatment option for bone metastases in solid tumors compared to zoledronic acid. The application of CHEER (2022) enhances the reliability of pharmacoeconomic evaluations.
Denosumab/therapeutic use* ; Humans ; Bone Neoplasms/economics* ; Cost-Benefit Analysis

Allergen specific immunotherapy（AIT）, as an effective treatment for allergic rhinitis, asthma, and other allergic diseases, has received widespread attention in the field of health economic evaluation in recent years. This article reviews the current status and progress of economic research on AIT, mainly discussing the socioeconomic burden of allergic rhinitis, the results of health economic studies from different countries, and the primary methods used in health economic research on allergic rhinitis. Existing studies indicate that, although AIT involves high initial costs, it offers significant long-term economic benefits by reducing healthcare resource utilization, improving patient quality of life, and decreasing medication dependence. Moreover, reducing initial costs, applying standardized assessment tools, and conducting cross-national comparative analyses have become key directions for future research. Overall, AIT demonstrates strong potential in terms of long-term health benefits and cost savings, providing solid economic evidence for the management of allergic diseases.
Humans ; Desensitization, Immunologic/economics* ; Cost-Benefit Analysis ; Rhinitis, Allergic/economics* ; Economics, Medical

Objective To evaluate the reliability and validity and perform cost-consequence analysis of the brief version of the Montreal cognitive assessment(MoCA)for identifying cognitive impairment in a community-based population ≥50 years of age.Methods The internal consistency and retest reliability of the brief version of the MoCA were analyzed,and the area under the curve(AUC),sensitivity,and specificity were determined to discriminate mild cognitive impairment(MCI)and dementia with the clinical dementia rating(CDR)as the diagnostic criterion.The consistency between the brief version and the full version was analyzed by the Kappa test and the Bland-Altman method,and the number of individuals entering the diagnostic assessment and the overall assessment time were estimated and compared between the two versions.Results A total of 303 individuals were included in this study,of whom 192,94,and 17 had normal cognitive function,MCI,and dementia,respectively.The Cronbach's α and re-test coefficients of the brief version of MoCA were 0.754 and 0.711(P<0.001),respectively.The brief version showed the AUC,sensitivity,and specificity of 0.889,74.5%,and 93.8% for identifying MCI,and 0.994,100%,and 93.8% for identifying dementia,respectively.When the brief version of MoCA was used to identify 94 patients with MCI in 303 individuals,107 individuals required additional diagnostic assessment,with an overall assessment time of 142.4 h,which represented decreases of 21.3% and 32.7%,respectively,compared with those of the full version.When the brief version of MoCA was used to identify 17 patients with dementia in 303 individuals,35 individuals required additional diagnostic assessment,with an overall assessment time of 70.4 h,a decrease of 29.5% in the time cost compared with the full version.Conclusions The brief version of MoCA can identify cognitively impaired individuals in a community-based middle-aged and elderly population,with diagnostic validity comparable to that of the full version but less time cost and fewer individuals needing additional diagnostic assessment to detect true-positive cases.It could be expanded for use in the community-based primary screening setting.
Humans ; Aged ; Middle Aged ; Cognitive Dysfunction/diagnosis* ; Male ; Female ; Mental Status and Dementia Tests ; Reproducibility of Results ; Dementia/diagnosis* ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Aged, 80 and over ; Cost-Benefit Analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study determined which of the anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGF) agents is the most cost-effective in treating patients with diabetic macular edema (DME).

This study was a cost-effectiveness analysis. A decision-analytic Markov cohort model of the natural history and treatment of DME was developed. Data was obtained from a meta-analysis by Virgili et al. on anti-VEGFs for DME in which intravitreal injections of bevacizumab given monthly, 6-weekly, and 12-weekly; ranibizumab given monthly, bimonthly, and as necessary; aflibercept given monthly, bimonthly, and as necessary; and macular laser therapy were evaluated for efficacy and safety in 4,413 eyes. Costs were obtained from local standard retail price at a tertiary government institution and assumed an out-of-pocket expenditure. The study measured and compared gains in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental costeffectiveness ratios (ICERs) for each treatment regimen.

Quarterly bevacizumab, monthly ranibizumab (3.82 QALY), and bimonthly ranibizumab injections were the three most beneficial dosing schedules in terms of clinical effectiveness at 3.81, 3.82, and 3.89 QALY, respectively. However, in terms of cost, bevacizumab was substantially most affordable. Quarterly dosing of bevacizumab provided the best value for money, with an ICER of PhP 9,661.70 per QALY gained.

Quarterly intravitreal injections of bevacizumab were identified as the most cost-effective treatment regimen for DME. To be considered cost-effective alternatives, ranibizumab requires an 85% price reduction, while aflibercept needs a price reduction exceeding 95%. We recommend quarterly bevacizumab injections be included in the national insurance coverage package, given their cost-effectiveness and clinical efficacy in the treatment of DME.