Cost-effectiveness of intensified versus conventional multifactorial intervention in type 2 diabetes: Results and projections from the steno-2 study

Peter Gæde, William J. Valentine, Andrew J. Palmer, Daniel M.D. Tucker, Morten Lammert, Hans Henrik Parving, Oluf Pedersen

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftArtikelForskningpeer review

    Abstrakt

    OBJECTIVE - To assess the cost-effectiveness of intensive versus conventional therapy for 8 years as applied in the Steno-2 study in patients with type 2 diabetes and microalbuminuria. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - A Markov model was developed to incorporate event and risk data from Steno-2 and account Danish-specific costs to project life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE), and lifetime direct medical costs expressed in year 2005 Euros. Clinical and cost outcomes were projected over patient lifetimes and discounted at 3% annually. Sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS - Intensive treatment was associated with increased life expectancy, QALE, and lifetime costs compared with conventional treatment. Mean ± SD undiscounted life expectancy was 18.1 ± 7.9 years with intensive treatment and 16.2 ± 7.3 years with conventional treatment (difference 1.9years). Discounted life expectancy was 13.4 ± 4.8 years with intensive treatment and 12.4 ± 4.5 years with conventional treatment. Lifetime costs (discounted) for intensive and conventional treatment were €45,521 ± 19,697 and €41,319 ± 27,500, respectively (difference €4,202). Increased costs with intensive treatment were due to increased pharmacy and consultation costs. Discounted QALE was 1.66 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) higher for intensive (10.2 ± 3.6 QALYs) versus conventional (8.6 ± 2.7 QALYs) treatment, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €2,538 per QALY gained. This is considered a conservative estimate because accounting prescription of generic drugs and capturing indirect costs would further favor intensified therapy. CONCLUSIONS - From a health care payer perspective in Denmark, intensive therapy was more cost-effective than conventional treatment. Assuming that patients in both arms were treated in a primary care setting, intensive therapy became dominant (cost- and lifesaving).

    OriginalsprogEngelsk
    Sider (fra-til)1510-1515
    Antal sider6
    TidsskriftDiabetes Care
    Vol/bind31
    Udgave nummer8
    DOI
    StatusUdgivet - 1 aug. 2008

    Fingeraftryk

    Udforsk hvilke forskningsemner 'Cost-effectiveness of intensified versus conventional multifactorial intervention in type 2 diabetes: Results and projections from the steno-2 study' indeholder.

    Citationsformater