Literature DB >> 30403576

Cost-effectiveness of Initiating an Insulin Pump in T1D Adults Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring Compared with Multiple Daily Insulin Injections: The DIAMOND Randomized Trial.

Wen Wan1,2,3, M Reza Skandari1,2,3, Alexa Minc1,2,3, Aviva G Nathan1,2,3, Parmida Zarei1,2,3, Aaron N Winn1,2,3, Michael O'Grady1,2,3, Elbert S Huang1,2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The economic impact of both continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and insulin pumps (continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion [CSII]) in type 1 diabetes (T1D) have been evaluated separately. However, the cost-effectiveness of adding CSII to existing CGM users has not yet been assessed.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the societal cost-effectiveness of CSII versus continuing multiple daily injections (MDI) in adults with T1D already using CGM.
METHODS: In the second phase of the DIAMOND trial, 75 adults using CGM were randomized to either CGM+CSII or CGM+MDI (control) and surveyed at baseline and 28 weeks. We performed within-trial and lifetime cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) and estimated lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) via a modified Sheffield T1D model.
RESULTS: Within the trial, the CGM+CSII group had a significant reduction in quality of life from baseline (-0.02 ± 0.05 difference in difference [DiD]) compared with controls. Total per-person 28-week costs were $8,272 (CGM+CSII) versus $5,623 (CGM+MDI); the difference in costs was primarily attributable to pump use ($2,644). Pump users reduced insulin intake (-12.8 units DiD) but increased the use of daily number of test strips (+1.2 DiD). Pump users also increased time with glucose in range of 70 to 180 mg/dL but had a higher HbA1c (+0.13 DiD) and more nonsevere hypoglycemic events. In the lifetime CEA, CGM+CSII would increase total costs by $112,045 DiD, decrease QALYs by 0.71, and decrease life expectancy by 0.48 years.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on this single trial, initiating an insulin pump in adults with T1D already using CGM was associated with higher costs and reduced quality of life. Additional evidence regarding the clinical effects of adopting combinations of new technologies from trials and real-world populations is needed to confirm these findings.

Entities:  

Keywords:  continuous glucose monitoring; cost-effectiveness; insulin pump; randomized clinical trial; type 1 diabetes

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30403576      PMCID: PMC6226055          DOI: 10.1177/0272989X18803109

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  63 in total

1.  Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion.

Authors: 
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 19.112

2.  Is glycemic control improving in U.S. adults?

Authors:  Thomas J Hoerger; Joel E Segel; Edward W Gregg; Jinan B Saaddine
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2007-10-12       Impact factor: 19.112

3.  Medicaid increases emergency-department use: evidence from Oregon's Health Insurance Experiment.

Authors:  Sarah L Taubman; Heidi L Allen; Bill J Wright; Katherine Baicker; Amy N Finkelstein
Journal:  Science       Date:  2014-01-02       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 4.  Self-monitoring of blood glucose.

Authors:  S K Garg; I B Hirsch
Journal:  Int J Clin Pract Suppl       Date:  2011-02

5.  Health-economic analysis of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in people with Type 1 diabetes.

Authors:  S Roze; R Saunders; A-S Brandt; S de Portu; N L Papo; J Jendle
Journal:  Diabet Med       Date:  2015-01-06       Impact factor: 4.359

6.  The cost-effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes.

Authors:  Elbert S Huang; Michael O'Grady; Anirban Basu; Aaron Winn; Priya John; Joyce Lee; David Meltzer; Craig Kollman; Lori Laffel; William Tamborlane; Stuart Weinzimer; Tim Wysocki
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2010-03-23       Impact factor: 17.152

Review 7.  Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) versus multiple insulin injections for type 1 diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Marie L Misso; Kristine J Egberts; Matthew Page; Denise O'Connor; Jonathan Shaw
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2010-01-20

Review 8.  Methods for insulin delivery and glucose monitoring in diabetes: summary of a comparative effectiveness review.

Authors:  Sherita Hill Golden; Tamar Sapir
Journal:  J Manag Care Pharm       Date:  2012-08

9.  Recommendations for Conduct, Methodological Practices, and Reporting of Cost-effectiveness Analyses: Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine.

Authors:  Gillian D Sanders; Peter J Neumann; Anirban Basu; Dan W Brock; David Feeny; Murray Krahn; Karen M Kuntz; David O Meltzer; Douglas K Owens; Lisa A Prosser; Joshua A Salomon; Mark J Sculpher; Thomas A Trikalinos; Louise B Russell; Joanna E Siegel; Theodore G Ganiats
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2016-09-13       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Valuing health-related quality of life: An EQ-5D-5L value set for England.

Authors:  Nancy J Devlin; Koonal K Shah; Yan Feng; Brendan Mulhern; Ben van Hout
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2017-08-22       Impact factor: 3.046

View more
  1 in total

1.  RT-CGM in conjunction with CSII vs MDI in optimizing glycaemic control in T1DM: Systemic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jimmy William; Jane McCluskey; Nigel Gleeson
Journal:  Endocrinol Diabetes Metab       Date:  2022-02-04
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.