COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF EXERCISE PROGRAMS IN TYPE 2 DIABETES

Background: A randomized controlled trial has shown that supervised, facility-based exercise training is effective in improving glycemic control in type 2 diabetes. However, these programs are associated with additional costs. This analysis assessed the cost-effectiveness of such programs.Methods: Analysis used data from the Diabetes Aerobic and Resistance Exercise (DARE) clinical trial which compared three different exercise programs (resistance, aerobic or a combination of both) of 6 months duration with a control group (no exercise program). Clinical outcomes at 6 months were entered for individual patients into the UKPDS economic model for type 2 diabetes adapted for the Canadian context. From this, expected life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs were estimated for all patients within the trial.Results: The combined exercise program was the most expensive ($40,050) followed by the aerobic program ($39,250), the resistance program ($38,300) and no program ($31,075). QALYs were highest for combined (8.94), followed by aerobic (8.77), resistance (8.73) and no program (8.70). The incremental cost per QALY gained for the combined exercise program was $4,792 compared with aerobic alone, $8,570 compared with resistance alone, and $37,872 compared with no program. The combined exercise program remained cost-effective for all scenarios considered within sensitivity analysis.Conclusions: A program providing training in both resistance and aerobic exercise was the most cost-effective of the alternatives compared. Based on previous funding decisions, exercise training for individuals with diabetes can be considered an efficient use of resources.

Download Full-text

The cost–effectiveness of oral semaglutide versus empagliflozin in Type 2 diabetes in Denmark

Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research ◽

10.2217/cer-2021-0169 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Lars H Ehlers ◽

Mark Lamotte ◽

Mafalda C Ramos ◽

Susanne Sandgaard ◽

Pia Holmgaard ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

Duration Of Treatment ◽

Diabetes Model ◽

Life Years ◽

The Cost

Aim: To evaluate the cost–effectiveness of oral semaglutide+metformin versus empagliflozin+metformin in people with Type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on msetformin alone. Materials and methods: The IQVIA Core Diabetes Model was populated with efficacy data from a head-to-head study between oral semaglutide+metformin and empagliflozin+metformin. Danish costs and quality-of-life data were sourced from literature. Price per day was Danish Krone (DKK) 25.53 for oral semaglutide and DKK11.40 for empagliflozin. Discounting was fixed at 4%. Scenario and sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: Over a lifetime, Core Diabetes Model projected 8.78 and 8.75 quality-adjusted life-years and a total cost of DKK 447,633 and DKK 387,786; thereby, generating an incremental cost–effectiveness ratio of DKK 1,930,548 for oral semaglutide+metformin versus empagliflozin+metformin. Scenario and sensitivity analyses showed the robustness of the outcomes. Duration of treatment with oral semaglutide is the key driver of the analyses. Conclusion: Oral semaglutide+metformin seems not cost-effective versus empagliflozin+metformin in patients uncontrolled on metformin in Denmark.

Download Full-text

Cost–effectiveness analysis of empagliflozin compared with glimepiride in patients with Type 2 diabetes in China

Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research ◽

10.2217/cer-2020-0284 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Ahmed Salem ◽

Peng Men ◽

Mafalda Ramos ◽

Yan-Jun Zhang ◽

Anastasia Ustyugova ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Quality Adjusted Life Years ◽

System Perspective ◽

Diabetes Model ◽

Life Years ◽

Cost Effective Treatment ◽

The Cost

Aim: The study assesses the cost–effectiveness of empagliflozin versus glimepiride in patients with Type 2 diabetes and uncontrolled by metformin alone in China, based on the EMPA-REG H2H-SU trial. Materials & methods: A calibrated version of the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model was used. Cost of complications and utility were taken from literature. The Chinese healthcare system perspective and 5% discounting rates were applied. Results: Empagliflozin+metformin provides additional quality-adjusted life-years (0.317) driven by a reduction in the number of cardiovascular and renal events, for an additional cost of $1382 (CNY9703) compared with glimepiride+metformin. Conclusion: Empagliflozin is cost-effective treatment versus glimepiride applying a threshold of $30,290 (CNY212,676).

Download Full-text

Within trial cost-effectiveness of a structured lifestyle intervention in adults with overweight/obesity and type 2 diabetes: Results from the Action for Health in Diabetes (Look AHEAD) Study

10.2337/figshare.13084802 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Ping Zhang ◽

Karen M. Atkinson ◽

George Bray ◽

Haiying Chen ◽

Jeanne M. Clark ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Lifestyle Intervention ◽

Health Utility Index ◽

Health Benefit ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Health Utility ◽

Health Care Expenditures ◽

Quality Adjusted Life Year

OBJECTIVE To assess the cost-effectiveness (CE) of an intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) compared to standard diabetes support and education (DSE) in adults with overweight/obesity and type 2 diabetes, as implemented in the Action for Health in Diabetes study. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Data were from 4,827 participants during the first 9 years of the study from 2001 to 2012. Information on Health Utility Index-2 and -3, SF-6D, and Feeling Thermometer [FT]), cost of delivering the interventions, and health expenditures were collected during the study. CE was measured by incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Future costs and QALYs were discounted at 3% annually. Costs were in 2012 US dollars. RESULTS <a>Over the </a>9 years studied, the mean cumulative intervention costs and mean cumulative health care expenditures were $11,275 and $64,453 per person for ILI and $887 and $68,174 for DSE. Thus, ILI cost $6,666 more per person than DSE. Additional QALYs gained by ILI were not statistically significant measured by the HUIs and were 0.17 and 0.16, respectively, measured by SF-6D and FT. The ICERs ranged from no health benefit with a higher cost based on HUIs, to $96,458/QALY and $43,169/QALY, respectively, based on SF-6D and FT. Conclusions Whether ILI was cost-effective over the 9-year period is unclear because different health utility measures led to different conclusions.

Download Full-text

A systematic review of economic evaluations in non-insulin antidiabetic treatments for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment Italian Northern Europe and Spanish ◽

10.1177/2284240319876574 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 2019 ◽

pp. 228424031987657 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Néboa Zozaya ◽

Margarita Capel ◽

Susana Simón ◽

Alfonso Soto-González

Keyword(s):

Diabetes Mellitus ◽

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus ◽

Management Strategies ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Cost Utility ◽

Economic Evaluations ◽

Life Years ◽

Comparative Results

The approval of new non-insulin treatments has broadened the therapeutic arsenal, but it has also increased the complexity of choice for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2). The objective of this study was to systematically review the literature on economic evaluations associated with non-insulin antidiabetic drugs (NIADs) for DM2. We searched in Medline, IBECS, Doyma and SciELO databases for full economic evaluations of NIADs in adults with DM2 applied after the failure of the first line of pharmacological treatment, published between 2010 and 2017, focusing on studies that incorporated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The review included a total of 57 studies, in which 134 comparisons were made between NIADs. Under an acceptability threshold of 25,000 euros per QALY gained, iSLGT-2 were preferable to iDPP-4 and sulfonylureas in terms of incremental cost-utility. By contrast, there were no conclusive comparative results for the other two new NIAD groups (GLP-1 and iDPP-4). The heterogeneity of the studies’ methodologies and results hindered our ability to determine under what specific clinical assumptions some NIADs would be more cost-effective than others. Economic evaluations of healthcare should be used as part of the decision-making process, so multifactorial therapeutic management strategies should be established based on the patients’ clinical characteristics and preferences as principal criteria.

Download Full-text

Choice across 10 pharmacologic combination strategies for type 2 diabetes: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BMC Medicine ◽

10.1186/s12916-020-01837-x ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 18 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Shuyan Gu ◽

Lizheng Shi ◽

Hui Shao ◽

Xiaoyong Wang ◽

Xiaoqian Hu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Chinese Patients ◽

Oral Drug ◽

System Perspective ◽

Treatment Comparison ◽

Combination Strategies ◽

Life Years ◽

The Cost

Abstract Background Clinical guidelines recommend a stepped-escalation treatment strategy for type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Across multiple treatment strategies varying in efficacy and costs, no clinical or economic studies directly compared them. This study aims to estimate and compare the cost-effectiveness of 10 commonly used pharmacologic combination strategies for T2DM. Methods Based on Chinese guideline and practice, 10 three-stepwise add-on strategies were identified, which start with metformin, then switch to metformin plus one oral drug (i.e., sulfonylurea, thiazolidinedione, α-glucosidase inhibitor, glinide, or DPP-4 inhibitor) as second line, and finally switch to metformin plus one injection (i.e., insulin or GLP-1 receptor agonist) as third line. A cohort of 10,000 Chinese patients with newly diagnosed T2DM was established. From a healthcare system perspective, the Cardiff model was used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the strategies, with clinical data sourced from a systematic review and indirect treatment comparison of 324 trials, costs from claims data of 1164 T2DM patients, and utilities from an EQ-5D study. Outcome measures include costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and net monetary benefits (NMBs). Results Over 40-year simulation, the costs accumulated for a patient ranged from $7661 with strategy 1 to $14,273 with strategy 10, while the QALY gains ranged from 13.965 with strategy 1 to 14.117 with strategy 8. Strategy 7 was dominant over seven strategies (strategies 2~6, 9~10) with higher QALYs but lower costs. Additionally, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $30,787/QALY (i.e., 3 times GDP/capita for China), strategy 7 was cost-effective compared with strategy 1 (ICER of strategy 7 vs. 1, $3371/QALY) and strategy 8 (ICER of strategy 8 vs. 7, $132,790/QALY). Ranking the strategies by ICERs and NMBs, strategy 7 provided the best value for money when compared to all other strategies, followed by strategies 5, 9, 8, 1, 3, 6, 10, 2, and 4. Scenario analyses showed that patients insist on pharmacologic treatments increased their QALYs (0.456~0.653) at an acceptable range of cost increase (ICERs, $1450/QALY~$12,360/QALY) or even at cost saving compared with those not receive treatments. Conclusions This study provides evidence-based references for diabetes management. Our findings can be used to design the essential drug formulary, infer clinical practice, and help the decision-maker design reimbursement policy.

Download Full-text

The Effects of Combined Exercise Training (Resistance-Aerobic) on Serum Kinesin and Physical Function in Type 2 Diabetes Patients with Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy (Randomized Controlled Trials)

Journal of Diabetes Research ◽

10.1155/2020/6978128 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 2020 ◽

pp. 1-7

Author(s):

Seyedeh Hoda Seyedizadeh ◽

Sadegh Cheragh-Birjandi ◽

Mohammad Reza Hamedi Nia

Keyword(s):

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Peripheral Neuropathy ◽

Exercise Training ◽

Physical Function ◽

Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy ◽

Diabetic Patients ◽

Combined Exercise ◽

Combined Exercise Training ◽

Diabetes Patients

Diabetic peripheral neuropathy is one of the most common chronic complications of diabetics which causes nerve damage and muscle strength decrease in patients. This in turn results in imbalance leading to the diabetic patients’ daily activity disparity. The present investigation was conducted to specifically study the effects of combined training (resistance-aerobic) on serum kinesin-1 and physical function in type 2 diabetes patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy. 24 diabetic neuropathic females were randomly to be selected out and divided into two experimental and control groups. The experimental group received resistance-aerobic training for 3 sessions during eight weeks. The exercise training included resistance exercises with 2-3 sets, 6-7 exercise stations, 8-12 repetitions (reps), and 3-5 minutes of rest in between the exercises, and the aerobic exercises contained 50-65% of heart rate reserve (HRR) for 3 minutes with 30 seconds of rest interval between sets and 5-10 repetitions. Results show that the serum kinesin-1 level and aerobic endurance declined after eight weeks of combined (resistance-aerobic) exercise training, but this decrease was not significant. The upper body strength increased but it was not significant, while the lower body showed a significant strength increase. With regard to the progressive nature of diabetic peripheral neuropathy, it seems that even the little changes resulting from the combined exercise training can be useful. Nevertheless, more research is required in this area.

Download Full-text

Influence of combined exercise training on indices of obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular risk in type 2 diabetes patients

Clinical Rehabilitation ◽

10.1177/0269215508084582 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 22 (6) ◽

pp. 483-492 ◽

Cited By ~ 65

Author(s):

Sabine Lambers ◽

Christophe Van Laethem ◽

Kristien Van Acker ◽

Patrick Calders

Keyword(s):

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Cardiovascular Risk ◽

Exercise Training ◽

Combined Exercise ◽

Combined Exercise Training ◽

Diabetes Patients

Download Full-text

The cost-effectiveness of testing strategies for type 2 diabetes: a modelling study

Health Technology Assessment ◽

10.3310/hta19330 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 19 (33) ◽

pp. 1-80 ◽

Cited By ~ 15

Author(s):

Mike Gillett ◽

Alan Brennan ◽

Penny Watson ◽

Kamlesh Khunti ◽

Melanie Davies ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

High Risk ◽

Risk Score ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Data Set ◽

Uptake Rates ◽

Multiethnic Population ◽

The Cost

BackgroundAn estimated 850,000 people have diabetes without knowing it and as many as 7 million more are at high risk of developing it. Within the NHS Health Checks programme, blood glucose testing can be undertaken using a fasting plasma glucose (FPG) or a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) test but the relative cost-effectiveness of these is unknown.ObjectivesTo estimate and compare the cost-effectiveness of screening for type 2 diabetes using a HbA1ctest versus a FPG test. In addition, to compare the use of a random capillary glucose (RCG) test versus a non-invasive risk score to prioritise individuals who should undertake a HbA1cor FPG test.DesignCost-effectiveness analysis using the Sheffield Type 2 Diabetes Model to model lifetime incidence of complications, costs and health benefits of screening.SettingEngland; population in the 40–74-years age range eligible for a NHS health check.Data sourcesThe Leicester Ethnic Atherosclerosis and Diabetes Risk (LEADER) data set was used to analyse prevalence and screening outcomes for a multiethnic population. Alternative prevalence rates were obtained from the literature or through personal communication.Methods(1) Modelling of screening pathways to determine the cost per case detected followed by long-term modelling of glucose progression and complications associated with hyperglycaemia; and (2) calculation of the costs and health-related quality of life arising from complications and calculation of overall cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), net monetary benefit and the likelihood of cost-effectiveness.ResultsBased on the LEADER data set from a multiethnic population, the results indicate that screening using a HbA1ctest is more cost-effective than using a FPG. For National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)-recommended screening strategies, HbA1cleads to a cost saving of £12 and a QALY gain of 0.0220 per person when a risk score is used as a prescreen. With no prescreen, the cost saving is £30 with a QALY gain of 0.0224. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicates that the likelihood of HbA1cbeing more cost-effective than FPG is 98% and 95% with and without a risk score, respectively. One-way sensitivity analyses indicate that the results based on prevalence in the LEADER data set are insensitive to a variety of alternative assumptions. However, where a region of the country has a very different joint HbA1cand FPG distribution from the LEADER data set such that a FPG test yields a much higher prevalence of high-risk cases relative to HbA1c, FPG may be more cost-effective. The degree to which the FPG-based prevalence would have to be higher depends very much on the uncertain relative uptake rates of the two tests. Using a risk score such as the Leicester Practice Database Score (LPDS) appears to be more cost-effective than using a RCG test to identify individuals with the highest risk of diabetes who should undergo blood testing.LimitationsWe did not include rescreening because there was an absence of required relevant evidence.ConclusionsBased on the multiethnic LEADER population, among individuals currently attending NHS Health Checks, it is more cost-effective to screen for diabetes using a HbA1ctest than using a FPG test. However, in some localities, the prevalence of diabetes and high risk of diabetes may be higher for FPG relative to HbA1cthan in the LEADER cohort. In such cases, whether or not it still holds that HbA1cis likely to be more cost-effective than FPG depends on the relative uptake rates for HbA1cand FPG. Use of the LPDS appears to be more cost-effective than a RCG test for prescreening.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Download Full-text

Economic evaluation of population-based type 2 diabetes mellitus screening at different healthcare settings in Vietnam

PLoS ONE ◽

10.1371/journal.pone.0261231 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 (12) ◽

pp. e0261231

Author(s):

Phung Lam Toi ◽

Olivia Wu ◽

Montarat Thavorncharoensap ◽

Varalak Srinonprasert ◽

Thunyarat Anothaisintawee ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Diabetes Mellitus ◽

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Economic Evaluations ◽

Value For Money ◽

Healthcare Settings ◽

Annual Screening

Introduction Few economic evaluations have assessed the cost-effectiveness of screening type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in different healthcare settings. This study aims to evaluate the value for money of various T2DM screening strategies in Vietnam. Methods A decision analytical model was constructed to compare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of T2DM screening in different health care settings, including (1) screening at commune health station (CHS) and (2) screening at district health center (DHC), with no screening as the current practice. We further explored the costs and QALYs of different initial screening ages and different screening intervals. Cost and utility data were obtained by primary data collection in Vietnam. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated from societal and payer perspectives, while uncertainty analysis was performed to explore parameter uncertainties. Results Annual T2DM screening at either CHS or DHC was cost-effective in Vietnam, from both societal and payer perspectives. Annual screening at CHS was found as the best screening strategy in terms of value for money. From a societal perspective, annual screening at CHS from initial age of 40 years was associated with 0.40 QALYs gained while saving US$ 186.21. Meanwhile, one-off screening was not cost-effective when screening for people younger than 35 years old at both CHS and DHC. Conclusions T2DM screening should be included in the Vietnamese health benefits package, and annual screening at either CHS or DHC is recommended.

Download Full-text