OBJECTIVES: :Mortality of Stroke in China is highest in the world, having brought a heavy financial burden to society. And the number of acute Ischemic Stroke accounted for 75% of the total cases. This study wants to evaluate the treatment program to find a better cost effectiveness treatment to offer reference for patients and clinicians choosing the right treatment. METHODS: A total of 145 cases with acute Ischemic Stroke during a period of 2007 -2008 admitted in 21 hospitals in China were divided randomly into two groups. One group of 69 patients was treated by Butylphthalide sodium chloride injection and Aspirin, another group of 66 patients were treated by Ozagrel injection and Aspirin. Two kinds of therapy were evaluated by double-blind, double-dummy trial from patients’ perspective. Utility of patients was investigated with EQ-5D.Direct costs were collected from HIS and questionnaires, indirect costs were estimated based on the opportunity cost of the time for caring and curing. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using nonparametric Bootstrapping was done. RESULTS: From the EQ-5D score we can learn that the improved values of Butylphthalide group score during 8-14 days and 15-90 days are higher than that of Ozagrel group, the average cost per QALY (Quality-Adjusted Life-year) of a patient for Butylphthalide group (RMB 225,753.4) was lower, with RMB 11,706.3, than Ozagrel group (RMB 237,459.7), and incremental costs were RMB 451,710.5[95%CI, RMB 218,689.55-1080, 313.05]. The acceptability curve generated from the ICUR can be seen the possibility of Ozagrel group having the cost –effectiveness advantage is zero if the willingness to pay per QALY is lower than RMB 192,000.CONCLUSIONS: :Switching from the current programmed to Butylphthalide group is more cost-effective as compared to Ozagrel group.