High-technology medical equipment (HTME) are important health resources. However, there is unequal distribution of these equipment in favor of metropolis and well equipped health facilities. This study sought to examine the equity gaps in the distribution of HTME in Guangxi. The results of this study could shed light on the future HTME allocation in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region. Data related to HTME was sourced from a general investigation of all the hospitals of Guangxi. Concentration index was used to assess the equity status of HTME in Guangxi. Over all, the total amount of HTME in Guangxi had been increasing from 2011 to 2015, and the per million population HTME of five kinds were all increased at the same time. Meanwhile, the concentration indices ranged between 0.1020 and 0.4617. The five medical equipment were all concentrated among the rich. The possession of SPECT per million population in Guangxi is lower than the national average level while it is superior to the national average level for CT, MRI, DSA and LA. The equity status in the distribution of the five medical equipment has deteriorated since 2011. In 2015, the equity status of CT was the best, while the equity status of MRI was the worst. Meanwhile, 45.1% of HTME were concentrated in Nanning, Guilin, and Liuzhou.

Background: To estimate the long-term cost-effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide versus sitagliptin as an add-on therapy for type 2 diabetes patients inadequately controlled on metformin in China, to better inform healthcare decision making. Methods: The Cardiff diabetes model which is a Monte Carlo micro-simulation model was used to project short-term effects of once-weekly semaglutide versus sitagliptin into long-term outcomes. Short-term data of patient profiles and treatment effects were derived from the 30-week SUSTAIN China trial, in which 868 type 2 diabetes patients with a mean age of 53.1 years inadequately controlled on metformin were randomized to receive once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg, once-weekly semaglutide 1 mg, or sitagliptin 100 mg. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated from a healthcare system perspective at a discount rate of 5%. Univariate sensitivity analysis, scenario analysis, and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were conducted to test the uncertainty. Results: Over patients’ lifetime projections, patients in both once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1 mg arms predicted less incidences of most vascular complications, mortality, and hypoglycemia, and lower total costs compared with those in sitagliptin arm. For an individual patient, compared with sitagliptin, once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg conferred a small QALY improvement of 0.08 and a lower cost of $5173, while once-weekly semaglutide 1 mg generated an incremental QALY benefit of 0.12 and a lower cost of $7142, as an add-on to metformin. Therefore, both doses of once-weekly semaglutide were considered dominant versus sitagliptin with more QALY benefits at lower costs. Conclusion: Once-weekly semaglutide may represent a cost-effective add-on therapy alternative to sitagliptin for type 2 diabetes patients inadequately controlled on metformin in China.