BACKGROUND: Severe hypoglycemic events (SHEs) in patients with diabetes are associated with substantial health care costs in the United States (US). Injectable glucagon (IG) is currently available for treatment of severe hypoglycemia but is associated with frequent handling errors. Nasal glucagon (NG) is a novel, easier-to-use treatment that is more often administered successfully. The economic impact of this usability advantage was explored in cost-offset and budget impact analyses for the US setting. METHODS: A health economic model was developed to estimate mean costs per SHE for which treatment was attempted using NG or IG, which differed only in the probability of treatment success, based on a published usability study. The budget impact of NG was projected over 2 years for patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes treated with basal-bolus insulin (T2D-BB). Epidemiologic and cost data were sourced from the literature and/or fee schedules. RESULTS: Mean costs were $992 lower if NG was used compared with IG per SHE for which a user attempted treatment. NG was estimated to reduce SHE-related spending by $1.1 million and $230 000 over 2 years in 10 000 patients each with T1D and T2D-BB, respectively. Reduced spending resulted from reduced professional emergency services utilization as successful treatment was more likely with NG. CONCLUSIONS: The usability advantage of NG over IG was projected to reduce SHE-related treatment costs in the US setting. NG has the potential to improve hypoglycemia emergency care and reduce SHE-related treatment costs.
BACKGROUND: Severe hypoglycemic events (SHEs) in patients with diabetes are associated with substantial health care costs in the United States (US). Injectable glucagon (IG) is currently available for treatment of severe hypoglycemia but is associated with frequent handling errors. Nasal glucagon (NG) is a novel, easier-to-use treatment that is more often administered successfully. The economic impact of this usability advantage was explored in cost-offset and budget impact analyses for the US setting. METHODS: A health economic model was developed to estimate mean costs per SHE for which treatment was attempted using NG or IG, which differed only in the probability of treatment success, based on a published usability study. The budget impact of NG was projected over 2 years for patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes treated with basal-bolus insulin (T2D-BB). Epidemiologic and cost data were sourced from the literature and/or fee schedules. RESULTS: Mean costs were $992 lower if NG was used compared with IG per SHE for which a user attempted treatment. NG was estimated to reduce SHE-related spending by $1.1 million and $230 000 over 2 years in 10 000 patients each with T1D and T2D-BB, respectively. Reduced spending resulted from reduced professional emergency services utilization as successful treatment was more likely with NG. CONCLUSIONS: The usability advantage of NG over IG was projected to reduce SHE-related treatment costs in the US setting. NG has the potential to improve hypoglycemia emergency care and reduce SHE-related treatment costs.
Entities:
Keywords:
United States; budget impact; cost-minimization; economic evaluation; nasal glucagon; severe hypoglycemia
Authors: Volker Foos; Nebibe Varol; Bradley H Curtis; Kristina S Boye; David Grant; James L Palmer; Phil McEwan Journal: J Med Econ Date: 2015-02-11 Impact factor: 2.448
Authors: Howard H Moffet; E Margaret Warton; Lee Siegel; Karl Sporer; Kasia J Lipska; Andrew J Karter Journal: Prehosp Emerg Care Date: 2017-06-22 Impact factor: 3.077
Authors: Paul Rostykus; Jamie Kennel; Kristian Adair; Micah Fillinger; Ryan Palmberg; Amy Quinn; Jonathan Ripley; Mohamud Daya Journal: Prehosp Emerg Care Date: 2016-03-01 Impact factor: 3.077
Authors: Michael R Rickels; Katrina J Ruedy; Nicole C Foster; Claude A Piché; Hélène Dulude; Jennifer L Sherr; William V Tamborlane; Kathleen E Bethin; Linda A DiMeglio; R Paul Wadwa; Andrew J Ahmann; Michael J Haller; Brandon M Nathan; Santica M Marcovina; Emmanouil Rampakakis; Linyan Meng; Roy W Beck Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2015-12-17 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Jennifer L Sherr; Katrina J Ruedy; Nicole C Foster; Claude A Piché; Hélène Dulude; Michael R Rickels; William V Tamborlane; Kathleen E Bethin; Linda A DiMeglio; Larry A Fox; R Paul Wadwa; Desmond A Schatz; Brandon M Nathan; Santica M Marcovina; Emmanouil Rampakakis; Linyan Meng; Roy W Beck Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2016-02-16 Impact factor: 19.112