Cost-effectiveness of insulin pumps compared with multiple daily injections both provided with structured education for adults with type 1 diabetes: a health economic analysis of the Relative Effectiveness of Pumps over Structured Education (REPOSE) randomised controlled trial

针对1型糖尿病成人患者,胰岛素泵与每日多次注射胰岛素联合结构化教育的成本效益比较:一项基于胰岛素泵相对于结构化教育的相对有效性(REPOSE)随机对照试验的卫生经济学分析

阅读:1

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of insulin pumps and Dose Adjustment for Normal Eating (pumps+DAFNE) compared with multiple daily insulin injections and DAFNE (MDI+DAFNE) for adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) in the UK. METHODS: We undertook a cost-utility analysis using the Sheffield Type 1 Diabetes Policy Model and data from the Relative Effectiveness of Pumps over Structured Education (REPOSE) trial to estimate the lifetime incidence of diabetic complications, intervention-based resource use and associated effects on costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). All economic analyses took a National Health Service and personal social services perspective and discounted costs and QALYs at 3.5% per annum. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed on the base case. Further uncertainties in the cost of pumps and the evidence used to inform the model were explored using scenario analyses. SETTING: Eight diabetes centres in England and Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with T1DM who were eligible to receive a structured education course and did not have a strong clinical indication or a preference for a pump. INTERVENTION: Pumps+DAFNE. COMPARATOR: MDI+DAFNE. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental costs, incremental QALYs gained and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS: Compared with MDI+DAFNE, pumps+DAFNE was associated with an incremental discounted lifetime cost of +£18 853 (95% CI £6175 to £31 645) and a gain in discounted lifetime QALYs of +0.13 (95% CI -0.70 to +0.96). The base case mean ICER was £142 195 per QALY gained. The probability of pump+DAFNE being cost-effective using a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per QALY gained was 14.0%. All scenario and subgroup analyses examined indicated that the ICER was unlikely to fall below £30 000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of the REPOSE data suggests that routine use of pumps in adults without an immediate clinical need for a pump, as identified by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, would not be cost-effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN61215213.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。