Multi-attribute Utility Theory Of Metformin And Acarbose Drug Regimen Alone Applied Research In Economics

Objective:this study aims to introduce multiple attribute utility theory (MAUT) evaluation methods into oral antidiabetic agents pharmacoeconomics (PE) evaluation..Building MAUT oral antidiabetic agents evaluation model, puts use to acarbose and metformin in effectiveness, safety and economic, through collecting related information, to investigate MUAT feasibility in the study of PE, broaden the drug research ideas in economics, enrich research methods, in order to better guide clinical rational drug use.Methods:the study selected number of95total cases, including47acarbose cases, and48metformin cases. According effectiveness, security and economics for evaluation dimensions, the study cshhose fasting plasma glucose (FPG)value,2-h plasma glucose (2hPG) and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbAlc) value, adverse reaction, direct medical costs and direct the medical cost to construct the MAUT oral antidiabetic agents PE evaluation model, by using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) determine various dimensions weight in the whole model. According to the nature of various indexes, the actual data will be exchanged into corresponding utility values according to MUAT utility values calculation method. Utility values will combined with two schemes with different dimensions weight, which will get the total value score of two therapeutic schemes.Results:two groups are comparable in age, sex, duration. Effectiveness weight of the evaluation model is0.320, security weight is0.445, economy weight is0.235. acarbose group effectiveness utility values40.07, security utility values40.18, economic utility values12.59; metformin group effectiveness utility values37.15, security utility values41.15, economic utility values18.03. Acarbose group total effectiveness scheme is33.66, metformin group total effectiveness scheme is34.44. metformin group regimen overall utility values above acarbose group. Cost-effectiveness analysis results, metformin cost-effectiveness is higher than acarbose.Conclusions:(1) weight score in three dimensions in the whole evaluation model respectively from high to low is security which is the most important, effectiveness and economy;(2) about the total value score, metformin group is higher than acarbose group, which shows that treatment of metformin is better than that of acarbose for type2diabetes.(3) the cure effect of two therapeutic schemes is not obvious during the research time limit; the overall adverse drug reaction incidence in two groups has no difference, adverse drug reactions are nearly consistent; the cost of two schemes mainly pays for drug cost, other expenses costs little.(4) comprehensive effect in metformin MAUT oral antidiabetic agents evaluation model is better than that of acarbose, cost-effectiveness of metformin is superior to that of acarbose; there is a consistent results in two methods above.