Literature DB >> 12036381

A guideline for the use of pharmacoeconomic models of diabetes treatment in the US managed-care environment.

David L Veenstra1, Scott D Ramsey, Sean D Sullivan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy has recently created guidelines for the submission of pharmacoeconomic models. Although these guidelines provide a general framework for the integration of pharmacoeconomic models in the drug selection process, a more disease-specific and practical 'hands-on' approach is needed for pharmacy staff and Pharmacy and Therapeutics (P&T) committee members.
OBJECTIVE: To answer the question, 'How can pharmacoeconomic models comparing treatments for diabetes and its complications be evaluated and used to make more informed formulary decisions?'
METHODS: We determined the information needs of a managed care organisation (MCO) making coverage decisions for diabetes therapies and reviewed current guidelines for the submission of pharmacoeconomic models to MCOs. We then developed a set of practical questions for evaluating models of diabetes treatment in a managed-care environment.
RESULTS: Information needed by P&T committees in relation to new diabetes medications includes the long-term benefits of reduced micro- and macrovascular complications and changes in drug utilisation patterns, in addition to the immediate drug budget impact. Because diabetes is a complex disease, the peer-review process should be relied on as a first step to help ensure the validity of a model. Then, the end-user of a model should evaluate the sources of data to inform the model,the generalisability of the model for an MCO population, andthe face validity of the assumptions of the model.
CONCLUSION: Pharmacoeconomic models in diabetes offer potential for assisting P&T committee members in making more informed decisions. The guidelines presented here provide a practical approach for model assessment. However, additional expertise will be needed by MCOs to appropriately evaluate these models, and joint educational programmes between managed care, academia, and industry should be considered as a mechanism for improving technology assessment in diabetes care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12036381     DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200220001-00003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  20 in total

Review 1.  Assessing quality in decision analytic cost-effectiveness models. A suggested framework and example of application.

Authors:  M Sculpher; E Fenwick; K Claxton
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Model of complications of NIDDM. II. Analysis of the health benefits and cost-effectiveness of treating NIDDM with the goal of normoglycemia.

Authors:  R C Eastman; J C Javitt; W H Herman; E J Dasbach; C Copley-Merriman; W Maier; F Dong; D Manninen; A S Zbrozek; J Kotsanos; S A Garfield; M Harris
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 19.112

Review 3.  Developing guidance for budget impact analysis.

Authors:  P Trueman; M Drummond; J Hutton
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  The Mt. Hood challenge: cross-testing two diabetes simulation models.

Authors:  J B Brown; A J Palmer; P Bisgaard; W Chan; K Pedula; A Russell
Journal:  Diabetes Res Clin Pract       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 5.602

5.  The global diabetes model: user friendly version 3.0.

Authors:  J B Brown; A Russell; W Chan; K Pedula; M Aickin
Journal:  Diabetes Res Clin Pract       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 5.602

6.  Economic consequences of diabetes mellitus in the U.S. in 1997. American Diabetes Association.

Authors: 
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 19.112

7.  Efficacy of metformin in type II diabetes: results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-response trial.

Authors:  A J Garber; T G Duncan; A M Goodman; D J Mills; J L Rohlf
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 4.965

8.  Effect of intensive blood-glucose control with metformin on complications in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 34). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1998-09-12       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1998-09-12       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Efficacy, safety, and dose-response characteristics of glipizide gastrointestinal therapeutic system on glycemic control and insulin secretion in NIDDM. Results of two multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials. The Glipizide Gastrointestinal Therapeutic System Study Group.

Authors:  D C Simonson; I A Kourides; M Feinglos; H Shamoon; C T Fischette
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 19.112

View more
  4 in total

1.  A role for two-stage pharmacoeconomic appraisal? Is there a role for interim approval of a drug for reimbursement based on modelling studies with subsequent full approval using phase III data?

Authors:  Suzanne Hill; Nick Freemantle
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  The role of models within economic analysis: focus on type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Douglas Coyle; Karen M Lee; Bernie J O'Brien
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  A review of methods used in long-term cost-effectiveness models of diabetes mellitus treatment.

Authors:  Jean-Eric Tarride; Robert Hopkins; Gord Blackhouse; James M Bowen; Matthias Bischof; Camilla Von Keyserlingk; Daria O'Reilly; Feng Xie; Ron Goeree
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Impact of a natural disaster on diabetes: exacerbation of disparities and long-term consequences.

Authors:  Vivian A Fonseca; Hayden Smith; Nitesh Kuhadiya; Sharice M Leger; C Lillian Yau; Kristi Reynolds; Lizheng Shi; Roberta H McDuffie; Tina Thethi; Jennifer John-Kalarickal
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2009-06-19       Impact factor: 19.112

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.