OBJECTIVE： To provide reference for further improving negotiation mechanism of drug medical insurance in China. METHODS： Questionnaire investigation was conducted among the medical insurance agency and pharmaceutical company staff who participated in drug medical insurance negotiation in Jiangsu province， Jiangxi province， Qingdao， Chengdu. Their business familiarity and recognition of the negotiating mechanism were also investigated. The descriptive analysis， independent sample t test and other methods were adopted to analyze the data statistically. RESULTS： A total of 70 questionnaires were distributed and 68 valid questionnaires were collected with effective recovery rate of 97.14％. Respondents included 21 staff members of medical insurance agencies and 47 of pharmaceutical companies. In terms of business familiarity， the average score of respondents in all aspects was greater than 3 （4 points system）， the lowest score was “management of the implementation of drug negotiation projects”. There were statistical significances in scores of 3 items between 2 parties in the negotiation （P＜0.05）： “basic principles of the drug negotiation process should be followed” “negotiation objectives in the substantive negotiation process” “ total score of business familiarity”. The scores of respondents in pharmaceutical companies were higher than those of health insurance agencies. In the recognition of the negotiating mechanism， average score of each survey item was ≥4 （5 points system） in the recognition of the overall effect of the negotiation mechanism except for “which is conducive to maintaining the price system of pharmaceutical companies”. The average score of all aspects of preparation of the negotiations， substantive negotiation， implementation of the negotiation agreement and negotiation project’s supervision and evaluation was ＞4 except for “patients taking drugs is quick and easy”. There was no statistical significance between 2 types of respondents in all aspects of overall effect of the negotiation mechanism， preparation of the negotiations and negotiation project’s supervision and evaluation （P＞0.05）. But in the recognition of the substantive negotiation， there was statistically significance between 2 types of respondents in “negotiations between the two sides in an equal， cooperative， harmonious atmosphere” （P＜0.05）. Healthcare agencies’ respondents had higher scores than pharmaceutical companies’ ones. And in the recognition of the implementation of the negotiation agreement， there was statistical significance between 2 types of respondents in the “after the agreement entered into force， the medical insurance agency will be strictly in accordance with the agreement” and “fund pay to pharmaceutical companies timely and reasonable” （P≤0.05）. Healthcare agencies’ respondents have higher scores for than pharmaceutical companies’ ones. CONCLUSIONS： The current drug medical insurance negotiation mechanism shows good overall effect and runs smoothly. But there are still some shortages， such as collected information the preparation stage is not sufficient； the procedures of patients taking the drug is complicated； negotiating parties do not have equal status； the fund is not paid to the pharmaceutical enterprise timely； evaluation is not perfect.