[Questionnaire investigation on cost-effectiveness analysis of acupuncture for XXXX ].

@entity1 @entity2704
OBJECTIVE: By using questionnaire method to understand the evaluation regarding cost-effectiveness of acupuncture for @entity2704 in both doctors and @entity1 . METHODS: By using questionnaire method, questionnaires for doctors and @entity1 were made respectively; by using network platform, two sets of questionnaires were publicly released, which were filled in online. The results were real-time background collected and then analyzed. RESULTS: Totally 696 effective questionnaires for @entity1 and 114 questionnaires for doctors were collected. The results indicated that (1)the direct cost (including treatment fee and material fee) for preventive treatment of @entity2704 was 109 yuan per time in regular acupuncture, 152 yuan per time in regular acupuncture + electroacupuncture (EA) and 238 yuan per time in acupoint catgut embedding. The travelling expense was 42 yuan per time within the city and 193 yuan per time between cities. The indirect cost included cost for loss of working time (208 yuan per time), cost for treatment time (acupoint catgut embedding: 10 to 30 min per time, once one to three weeks; the remaining two treatments: 20 to 50 min per time, once to 5 times every week), time cost for arriving and departing hospital (1 to 3 hours per time within the city and 4 hours per time between cities). From the angle of treatment course, acupoint catgut embedding reduced the treatment frequency, leading to a lower total cost. (2)A mong the reasons to select different acupuncture methods to treat @entity2704 , the results of @entity1 questionnaire indicated that the focus in the @entity1 who selected acupoint catgut embedding was different from that in the @entity1 who selected two other treatments. The main advantage of acupoint catgut embedding was superior and lasting efficacy with low cost. The results of doctor questionnaire indicated the main reason to select acupoint catgut embedding was "lasting efficacy after single treatment" (87. 5%) and "lower frequency of treatment" (75. 0%). (3) The main reason to obstruct the popularization of acupoint catgut embedding was this method was not widely known. CONCLUSION: The acupoint catgut embedding is one ideal preventive treatment for @entity2704 , which has higher cost-effectiveness, however, currently it is not widely applied. In future advertisement and training program should be strengthened to perform targeted popularization of acupoint catgut embedding for @entity2704 .
