ArticleESC heart failure2025
Cost-utility analysis of add-on Qili Qiangxin capsules in chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in China.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cost-utility analysis of add-on Qili Qiangxin capsules in chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in China.ESC heart failure · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe study aimed to analyse the cost-utility of Chinese patent medicine Qili Qiangxin (QLQX) capsules in heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction from the healthcare payer's perspective. METHODS AND
resultsFrom the perspective of the healthcare payer, a Markov model was established to estimate the cost-utility of adding QLQX capsules to standard treatment versus standard treatment. A 19-year lifetime horizon was chosen with a 3-month cycle in the base case analysis. The discount rate of cost and utility is 5%. Total costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for QLQX and standard treatment were simulated over a 19-year lifetime horizon by the Markov model using TreeAge Pro 2022. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was compared with the willingness-to-pay thresholds (the GDP per capita). The one-way sensitivity analysis and probability sensitivity analysis were conducted. Over a 19-year lifetime horizon, the mean total costs in the QLQX group and standard treatment group were 56 151.75 CNY and 30 099.69 CNY, respectively. The QALYs in the QLQX group were also greater than those in the standard treatment group (4.63 QALYs vs. 4.17 QALYs). The ICUR was 57 381.85 CNY per QALY, which was lower than the willingness-to-pay threshold (89 358 CNY). The one-way and probability sensitivity analyses showed that the results were robust. The inputs with the largest impact on ICUR were the cardiovascular mortality in both groups. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of 89 358 CNY, adding QLQX capsules to standard treatment was preferred over standard treatment alone in 51.10% of the 1000 PSA samples.
conclusionsThis cost-utility analysis suggested that adding QLQX capsules seems to be cost-effective of heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction patients from the healthcare payer's perspective in China. Future studies of QLQX capsules based on different economic systems and medical environments were also needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.