Cost-utility analysis
chronic neck pain, NRS, includedSensitivity
SENSITIVITY
From a societal perspective, pharmacopuncture was superior as it showed a slightly higher QALY and a lower cost of $1,157 compared to usual care. Based on $26,375 as the WTP among the Korean public, the probability of being cost-effective from a societal perspective was 100% based on both EQ-5D and SF-6D (Table 
Cost-effectiveness plane and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves of pharmacopuncture compared with usual careAn analysis from a healthcare perspective also showed a cost difference of $26, confirming that pharmacopuncture was better than usual care. Based on $26,375 as the WTP, the probability of cost-effectiveness from a societal perspective was 83.7% and 89.6% based on EQ-5D and SF-6D, respectively.
The results of cost-effective analysis for pharmacopuncture compared with usual careFor the base case analysis, QALY was calculated with EQ-5D in societal perspectives. The incremental cost was divided by the incremental QALY to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The distribution of cost and QALY was calculated by non-parametric bootstrapIn the main analysis, patients assigned to each group were followed-up up to 12 weeks, and missing values were imputed with multiple imputation. The costs from the healthcare system perspective include the costs of formal and informal healthcare involved in chronic neck pain treatment and the transportation and time costs. For the costs in the societal perspective, productivity costs from chronic neck pain are includedSensitivity analysis. 1 was a per-protocol analysis, which included patients who received at least six treatment sessions (47 in the pharmacopuncture group and 45 in the physical therapy group). Sensitivity analysis 2. Assuming that only employed patients suffered income loss due to time and productivity losses. Sensitivity analysis 3. We applied $26 by multiplying 1.5 with the pharmacopuncture cost in the base case analysis. Sensitivity analysis 4. We applied $35 by multiplying 2 with the pharmacopuncture cost in the base-case analysis. Sensitivity analysis 5. Cost effectiveness analysis based on NRS and NDI

