Cost-effectiveness analysis reveals TM plus benzodiazepines improves health outcomes in primary insomnia, indicating better healthcare access.
Objectives Building upon prior systematic reviews and network meta-analyses, this study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of four commercial Chinese polyherbal preparations (CCPPs)—Tian Meng Oral Liquid/Capsules (TM), Shen-Qi-Wu-Wei-Zi Tablets (SQWWZ), Wu Ling Capsules (WL), and Bai-Le-Mian Capsules (BLM)—for treating primary insomnia. Comparative findings informed clinical decision-making and health policy formulation. Methods A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from a healthcare system perspective. A patient disease course model was developed using systematic literature search and network meta-analysis combined with drug pricing data. Intervention strategies (monotherapy or combination therapy) were simulated to assess per-capita costs and health outcomes. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated and compared against the willingness-to-pay threshold. Deterministic sensitivity analysis (DSA), Monte Carlo simulations for probabilistic sensitivity analysis and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were used to test the overall stability and acceptable probability of the evaluation results. Results At a WTP threshold of ¥89,358.00 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), the combination of TM and benzodiazepines (BZDs) ranked highest in terms of cost-effectiveness, followed by WL, BLM, and SQWWZ. When the WTP threshold exceeded ¥5,897.63 per QALY, the probability that TM + BZDs was more cost-effective than WL increased. Likewise, when the WTP threshold was above ¥19,658.76 per QALY, the probability that BLM was more cost-effective than SQWWZ became greater. Conclusion Within the 60-day time horizon of this analysis, TM + BZDs demonstrated optimal cost-effectiveness for primary insomnia from a healthcare system perspective, followed by WL and BLM. Limitations in data sources constrain the generalizability of findings. Future studies adopt a societal perspective and incorporate individual-level data over longer time horizons to validate and extend current results through more comprehensive cost-utility evaluations. Furthermore, research should focus on Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM)-specific health utility scales and informing equity-focused reimbursement policies to fully capture the value of CCPPs, thereby ultimately optimizing healthcare access and resource allocation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: