Literature DB >> 16752172

What determines the cost-effectiveness of diabetes screening?

C Glümer1, M Yuyun, S Griffin, D Farewell, D Spiegelhalter, A L Kinmonth, N J Wareham.   

Abstract

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The cost-effectiveness of screening for diabetes is unknown but has been modelled previously. None of these models has taken account of uncertainty. We aimed to describe these uncertainties in a model where the outcome was CHD risk. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Our model used population data from the Danish Inter99 study, and simulations were run in a theoretical population of 1,000,000 individuals. CHD risk was estimated using the UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) risk engine, and risk reduction from published randomised clinical trials. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to provide confidence intervals for modelled outputs. Uncertain parameter values were independently simulated from distributions derived from existing literature and deterministic sensitivity analysis performed using multiple model runs under different strategy choices and using extreme parameter estimates.
RESULTS: In the least conservative model (low costs and multiplicative risk reduction for combined treatments), the 95% confidence interval of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio varied from pound23,300-82,000. The major contributors to this uncertainty were treatment risk reduction model parameters: the risk reduction for hypertension treatment and UKPDS risk model intercept. Overall cost-effectiveness ratio was not sensitive to decisions about which groups to screen, nor the costs of screening or treatment. It was strongly affected by assumptions about how treatments combine to reduce risk. CONCLUSIONS/
INTERPRETATION: Our model suggests that there is considerable uncertainty about whether or not screening for diabetes would be cost-effective. The most important but uncertain parameter is the effect of treatment. In addition to directly influencing current policy decisions, health care modelling can identify important unknown or uncertain parameters that may be the target of future research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16752172     DOI: 10.1007/s00125-006-0248-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabetologia        ISSN: 0012-186X            Impact factor:   10.122


  23 in total

Review 1.  Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models.

Authors:  A H Briggs
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

3.  A randomized non-pharmacological intervention study for prevention of ischaemic heart disease: baseline results Inter99.

Authors:  Torben Jørgensen; Knut Borch-Johnsen; Troels F Thomsen; Hans Ibsen; Charlotte Glümer; Charlotta Pisinger
Journal:  Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil       Date:  2003-10

4.  Standards of medical care in diabetes--2006.

Authors: 
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 19.112

5.  Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories.

Authors:  P W Wilson; R B D'Agostino; D Levy; A M Belanger; H Silbershatz; W B Kannel
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1998-05-12       Impact factor: 29.690

6.  Screening for diabetes in general practice: cross sectional population study.

Authors:  J M Lawrence; P Bennett; A Young; A M Robinson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-09-08

7.  Global burden of diabetes, 1995-2025: prevalence, numerical estimates, and projections.

Authors:  H King; R E Aubert; W H Herman
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 19.112

8.  Prevalences of diabetes and impaired glucose regulation in a Danish population: the Inter99 study.

Authors:  Charlotte Glümer; Torben Jørgensen; Knut Borch-Johnsen
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 19.112

9.  Multifactorial intervention and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Peter Gaede; Pernille Vedel; Nicolai Larsen; Gunnar V H Jensen; Hans-Henrik Parving; Oluf Pedersen
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-01-30       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  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

View more
  20 in total

1.  Screening for diabetes.

Authors:  Ronald P Stolk
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2007-08-30

2.  Screening for and prevention of type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Elizabeth C Goyder
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-04-21

3.  Guidelines and recommendations for laboratory analysis in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  David B Sacks; Mark Arnold; George L Bakris; David E Bruns; Andrea Rita Horvath; M Sue Kirkman; Ake Lernmark; Boyd E Metzger; David M Nathan
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 19.112

4.  HbA1c and cardiovascular risk score identify people who may benefit from preventive interventions: a 7 year follow-up of a high-risk screening programme for diabetes in primary care (ADDITION), Denmark.

Authors:  T Lauritzen; A Sandbaek; M V Skriver; K Borch-Johnsen
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2011-02-22       Impact factor: 10.122

5.  Cardiovascular risk reduction following diagnosis of diabetes by screening: 1-year results from the ADDITION-Cambridge trial cohort.

Authors:  Morten Charles; Rebecca K Simmons; Kate M Williams; Gojka Roglic; Stephen J Sharp; Ann-Louise Kinmonth; Nicholas J Wareham; Simon J Griffin
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 5.386

6.  Rationale and design of the ADDITION-Leicester study, a systematic screening programme and randomised controlled trial of multi-factorial cardiovascular risk intervention in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus detected by screening.

Authors:  D R Webb; K Khunti; B Srinivasan; L J Gray; N Taub; S Campbell; J Barnett; J Henson; S Hiles; A Farooqi; S J Griffin; N J Wareham; M J Davies
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2010-02-19       Impact factor: 2.279

7.  Different strategies for screening and prevention of type 2 diabetes in adults: cost effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Clare L Gillies; Paul C Lambert; Keith R Abrams; Alex J Sutton; Nicola J Cooper; Ron T Hsu; Melanie J Davies; Kamlesh Khunti
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-04-21

8.  Screening for diabetes mellitus using gingival crevicular blood with the help of a self-monitoring device.

Authors:  Subodh Gaikwad; Varsha Jadhav; Abhijit Gurav; Abhijeet R Shete; Hitesh M Dearda
Journal:  J Periodontal Implant Sci       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 2.614

9.  Impact of an informed choice invitation on uptake of screening for diabetes in primary care (DICISION): trial protocol.

Authors:  Eleanor Mann; A Toby Prevost; Simon Griffin; Ian Kellar; Stephen Sutton; Michael Parker; Simon Sanderson; Ann Louise Kinmonth; Theresa M Marteau
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-02-20       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  The ADDITION-Cambridge trial protocol: a cluster -- randomised controlled trial of screening for type 2 diabetes and intensive treatment for screen-detected patients.

Authors:  Justin B Echouffo-Tcheugui; Rebecca K Simmons; Kate M Williams; Roslyn S Barling; A Toby Prevost; Ann Louise Kinmonth; Nicholas J Wareham; Simon J Griffin
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-05-12       Impact factor: 3.295

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.