Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of NRICM101 Compared to Usual Care for Treating COVID-19

OBJECTIVES: To compare the cost-effectiveness of NRICM101, a traditional Chinese medicine, versus usual care for treating mild to moderate COVID-19 patients. NRICM101, plant-based formula targeting viral respiratory infection and immunomodulation, was suggested by the National Research Institute of Chinese Medicine (NRICM) after evaluating clinical symptoms, herbs with corresponding indications, and prior experience during 2003 SARS outbreak.

METHODS: Using ICD-10 code U07.1, we identified adult patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, excluding pregnant women and critically ill patients. Propensity score matching ensured comparable disease severity between the NRICM101 and usual care groups. A decision tree model was constructed to analyze cost-effectiveness from the payer's perspective. Real-world data from a medical center provided costs and disease progression probabilities, while utilities were from literature.

RESULTS: The base case showed NRICM101 was associated with higher quality-adjusted life months (QALMs) and lower costs compared to usual care. The incremental saving with NRICM101 was NT$12,533. The incremental effectiveness was 0.01716 QALMs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of NRICM101 versus usual care was NT$-730,404 per QALM gained.

CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests NRICM101 is cost-effective compared to usual care for mild COVID-19 treatment.