» Articles » PMID: 21917132

Cost-effectiveness of Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Intensive Insulin Therapy for Type 1 Diabetes

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2011 Sep 16
PMID 21917132
Citations 32
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Our objective was to determine the cost-effectiveness of Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) technology with intensive insulin therapy compared to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in adults with type 1 diabetes in the United States.

Methods: A Markov cohort analysis was used to model the long-term disease progression of 12 different diabetes disease states, using a cycle length of 1 year with a 33-year time horizon. The analysis uses a societal perspective to model a population with a 20-year history of diabetes with mean age of 40. Costs are expressed in $US 2007, effectiveness in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Parameter estimates and their ranges were derived from the literature. Utility estimates were drawn from the EQ-5D catalogue. Probabilities were derived from the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT), the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS), and the Wisconsin Epidemiologic Study of Diabetic Retinopathy. Costs and QALYs were discounted at 3% per year. Univariate and Multivariate probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted using 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations.

Results: Compared to SMBG, use of CGM with intensive insulin treatment resulted in an expected improvement in effectiveness of 0.52 QALYs, and an expected increase in cost of $23,552, resulting in an ICER of approximately $45,033/QALY. For a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $100,000/QALY, CGM with intensive insulin therapy was cost-effective in 70% of the Monte Carlo simulations.

Conclusions: CGM with intensive insulin therapy appears to be cost-effective relative to SMBG and other societal health interventions.

Citing Articles

A systematic review: Cost-effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring compared to self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 1 diabetes.

Jiao Y, Lin R, Hua X, Churilov L, Gaca M, James S Endocrinol Diabetes Metab. 2022; 5(6):e369.

PMID: 36112608 PMC: 9659662. DOI: 10.1002/edm2.369.


Healthcare Utilization, Costs, and Adverse Events of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring versus Traditional Blood Glucose Monitoring Among US Adults with Type 1 Diabetes.

Wong B, Deng Y, Rascati K J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2021; 16(6):1393-1400.

PMID: 34388953 PMC: 9631528. DOI: 10.1177/19322968211031519.


Hypoglycaemia among Insulin-Treated Patients with Diabetes: Southeast Asia Cohort of IO HAT Study.

Pathan F, Goh S, Rudijanto A, Gadekar A, Jain A, Nicodemus Jr N J ASEAN Fed Endocr Soc. 2021; 33(1):28-36.

PMID: 33442108 PMC: 7784114. DOI: 10.15605/jafes.033.01.05.


Cost-Effectiveness of a Continuous Glucose Monitoring Mobile App for Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Analysis Simulation.

Tsuji S, Ishikawa T, Morii Y, Zhang H, Suzuki T, Tanikawa T J Med Internet Res. 2020; 22(9):e16053.

PMID: 32940613 PMC: 7530685. DOI: 10.2196/16053.


Cost-effectiveness of health technologies in adults with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Pease A, Zomer E, Liew D, Lo C, Earnest A, Zoungas S Syst Rev. 2020; 9(1):171.

PMID: 32746937 PMC: 7401226. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-020-01373-y.


References
1.
. Economic costs of diabetes in the U.S. In 2007. Diabetes Care. 2008; 31(3):596-615. DOI: 10.2337/dc08-9017. View

2.
Nathan D, Cleary P, Backlund J, Genuth S, Lachin J, Orchard T . Intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2005; 353(25):2643-53. PMC: 2637991. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa052187. View

3.
Wu S, Sainfort F, Tomar R, Tollios J, Fryback D, Klein R . Development and application of a model to estimate the impact of type 1 diabetes on health-related quality of life. Diabetes Care. 1998; 21(5):725-31. DOI: 10.2337/diacare.21.5.725. View

4.
. Sustained effect of intensive treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus on development and progression of diabetic nephropathy: the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study. JAMA. 2003; 290(16):2159-67. PMC: 2622725. DOI: 10.1001/jama.290.16.2159. View

5.
Hoerger T, Harris R, Hicks K, Donahue K, Sorensen S, Engelgau M . Screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2004; 140(9):689-99. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-140-9-200405040-00008. View