S Roze1, J Smith-Palmer2, W Valentine2, S de Portu3, K Nørgaard4, J C Pickup5. 1. HEVA HEOR, Lyon, France. 2. Ossian Health Economics and Communications, Basel, Switzerland. 3. Medtronic International Sàrl, Tolochenaz, Switzerland. 4. Department of Endocrinology, Hvidovre University Hospital, Hvidovre, Denmark. 5. Diabetes Research Group, King's College London School of Medicine, Guy's Hospital, London, UK.
Abstract
AIM: Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) is increasingly used in clinical practice for the management of selected patients with Type 1 diabetes. Several cost-effectiveness studies comparing CSII vs. multiple insulin injections (MDI) have been reported. The aim was systematically to review these analyses and test the hypothesis that CSII is a cost-effective use of healthcare resources across settings. METHODS: A literature review was performed using MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and other databases. No time limit or language restrictions were applied. After two rounds of screening, 11 cost-effectiveness analyses were included in the final review, of which nine used the CORE Diabetes Model. A narrative synthesis was conducted and mean cost effectiveness calculated. RESULTS: CSII was considered cost-effective vs. MDI in Type 1 diabetes in all 11 studies in 8 countries, with a mean (95% CI) incremental cost effectiveness ratio of €30 862 (17 997-43 727), US$40 143 (23 409-56 876) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. CSII was associated with improved life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy (0.4-1.1 QALYs in adults), driven by lower HbA(1c) and lower frequency of hypoglycaemic events vs. MDI. CSII was associated with higher lifetime direct costs due to higher treatment costs but this was partially offset by cost-savings from reduced diabetes-related complications. CONCLUSIONS: Published cost-effectiveness analyses show that in Type 1 diabetes CSII is cost-effective vs. MDI across a number of settings for patients who have poor glycaemic control and/or problematic hypoglycaemia on MDI, with cost-effectiveness highly sensitive to the reduction in HbA1c and hypoglycaemia frequency associated with CSII.
AIM: Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) is increasingly used in clinical practice for the management of selected patients with Type 1 diabetes. Several cost-effectiveness studies comparing CSII vs. multiple insulin injections (MDI) have been reported. The aim was systematically to review these analyses and test the hypothesis that CSII is a cost-effective use of healthcare resources across settings. METHODS: A literature review was performed using MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and other databases. No time limit or language restrictions were applied. After two rounds of screening, 11 cost-effectiveness analyses were included in the final review, of which nine used the CORE Diabetes Model. A narrative synthesis was conducted and mean cost effectiveness calculated. RESULTS: CSII was considered cost-effective vs. MDI in Type 1 diabetes in all 11 studies in 8 countries, with a mean (95% CI) incremental cost effectiveness ratio of €30 862 (17 997-43 727), US$40 143 (23 409-56 876) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. CSII was associated with improved life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy (0.4-1.1 QALYs in adults), driven by lower HbA(1c) and lower frequency of hypoglycaemic events vs. MDI. CSII was associated with higher lifetime direct costs due to higher treatment costs but this was partially offset by cost-savings from reduced diabetes-related complications. CONCLUSIONS: Published cost-effectiveness analyses show that in Type 1 diabetes CSII is cost-effective vs. MDI across a number of settings for patients who have poor glycaemic control and/or problematic hypoglycaemia on MDI, with cost-effectiveness highly sensitive to the reduction in HbA1c and hypoglycaemia frequency associated with CSII.
Authors: Heather T Gold; Elizabeth Pirraglia; Elbert S Huang; Wen Wan; Andrea B Pascual; Ryan James Jensen; Andrea Gerard Gonzalez Journal: Pediatr Diabetes Date: 2021-05-06 Impact factor: 4.866
Authors: Daniel John Pollard; Alan Brennan; Simon Dixon; Norman Waugh; Jackie Elliott; Simon Heller; Ellen Lee; Michael Campbell; Hasan Basarir; David White Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-04-07 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Laura J Reid; Fraser W Gibb; Helen Colhoun; Sarah H Wild; Mark W J Strachan; Karen Madill; Baljean Dhillon; Shareen Forbes Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2021-05-08 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Svetlana V Doubova; Aldo Ferreira-Hermosillo; Ricardo Pérez-Cuevas; Casper Barsoe; Erick Gryzbowski-Gainza; Juan E Valencia Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2018-08-03 Impact factor: 2.655