The Investigation Of Current Status Of Centralized Drug Tender Procurement In China And The Study Of Its Performance Evaluation System

From2013to2014, we have investigated the status of centralized drug tender procurement in four provincial regions of China entrusted by the Department of Health Economy Information, the National Health Development Research Center. The draft indicator list of the performance evaluation system for the centralized drug tender procurement was subsequently developed based on this investigation. Sent by my mentor, I am the main participant of this investigation, and part of the data was reported in this thesis by the authority of the entrusting organization.Objective:1. To provide some suggestions for centralized drug tender procurement based on the investigation of its development and current status.2. To develop the preliminary performance evaluation system framework of centralized drug tender procurement, lay the foundation of further improvement for the evaluation of centralized drug tender procurement.Methods:1. Documents analysis and interview were applied to analyse the development, current status and issues of centralized drug tender procurement.2. Established the draft evaluation system, then, indicator screening and weight design were conducted by two rounds of expert consultation. After that, we developed the computational method for the performance evaluation system.Results:1. Centralized drug tender procurement ensured the quality of drug purchase, Prevented fast-rise of drug price, and regulated the drug procurement. However, it also caused other side-effects such as emphasized tender, overlooked procurement, non-standardized tender, Second bargaining, and out-of-network purchasing.2.3first-level indicators,10second-level indicators and33third-level indicators were established by Delphi method. In two rounds of expert consultation, active coefficient respectively were93.3%and100%. The expert authority coefficient for first-level indicators were all above0.8; The expert authority coefficient for second-level indicators were between0.69and0.83; The expert authority coefficient for third-level were between0.76and0.86. The expert coordinator coefficient for each level were respectively0.083,0.108and0.099(All significant at P>0.05). The weight of3first-level indicators was respectively33.30%,32.35%and34.35%.Conclusions:1.Centralized drug tender procurement has contributed greatly in ensuring the quality of drug purchase, preventing fast-rising of drug price, and regulating the drug procurement. However, it also caused other side-effects such as emphasized tender, overlooked procurement, non-standardized tender, second bargaining, and out-of-network purchasing, which require really attention from the relative government department. Appropriate measures and policy adjustment are in need.2.3first-level indicators,10second-level indicators and33third-level indicators were established by Delphi method. The weight of indicators were designed by comprehensive score method, and the comprehensive evaluation model has been built. It’s suggested that the further research which including the selection for experts, setting up for indicator and the standard for evaluation should be promoted to establish a performance evaluation system of centralized drug tender procurement which is more scientific and reasonable.