Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Diabetes Care. 2010 Feb;33(2):258-63. doi: 10.2337/dc09-1232. Epub 2009 Nov 23.
The Diabetes Care Protocol (DCP), a multifaceted computerized decision support diabetes management intervention, reduces cardiovascular risk of type 2 diabetic patients. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of DCP from a Dutch health care perspective.
A cluster randomized trial provided data of DCP versus usual care. The 1-year follow-up patient data were extrapolated using a modified Dutch microsimulation diabetes model, computing individual lifetime health-related costs, and health effects. Incremental costs and effectiveness (quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) were estimated using multivariate generalized estimating equations to correct for practice-level clustering and confounding. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were created. Stroke costs were calculated separately. Subgroup analyses examined patients with and without cardiovascular disease (CVD+ or CVD- patients, respectively).
Excluding stroke, DCP patients lived longer (0.14 life-years, P = NS), experienced more QALYs (0.037, P = NS), and incurred higher total costs (euro 1,415, P = NS), resulting in an ICER of euro 38,243 per QALY gained. The likelihood of cost-effectiveness given a willingness-to-pay threshold of euro 20,000 per QALY gained is 30%. DCP had a more favorable effect on CVD+ patients (ICER = euro 14,814) than for CVD- patients (ICER = euro 121,285). Coronary heart disease costs were reduced (euro-587, P < 0.05).
DCP reduces cardiovascular risk, resulting in only a slight improvement in QALYs, lower CVD costs, but higher total costs, with a high cost-effectiveness ratio. Cost-effective care can be achieved by focusing on cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetic patients with a history of CVD.
糖尿病护理方案(DCP)是一种多方面的计算机化决策支持糖尿病管理干预措施,可降低 2 型糖尿病患者的心血管风险。我们从荷兰医疗保健的角度对 DCP 进行了成本效益分析。
一项集群随机试验提供了 DCP 与常规护理的数据。使用经过修改的荷兰微观模拟糖尿病模型对 1 年随访的患者数据进行了外推,计算了个人终身与健康相关的成本和健康效果。使用多元广义估计方程估计增量成本和效果(质量调整生命年[QALYs]),以纠正实践水平聚类和混杂。计算了增量成本效益比(ICER)并绘制了成本效益可接受性曲线。分别计算了中风成本。亚组分析检查了有和没有心血管疾病(分别为 CVD+或 CVD-患者)的患者。
不包括中风,DCP 患者的寿命更长(0.14 生命年,P=无统计学意义),经历了更多的 QALYs(0.037,P=无统计学意义),并产生了更高的总费用(欧元 1415 欧元,P=无统计学意义),导致每获得一个 QALY 的增量成本效益比为 38243 欧元。如果愿意支付每获得一个 QALY 的 20000 欧元的阈值,那么成本效益的可能性为 30%。DCP 对 CVD+患者(ICER=14814 欧元)的效果优于 CVD-患者(ICER=121285 欧元)。冠心病成本降低(欧元-587,P<0.05)。
DCP 降低了心血管风险,仅导致 QALYs 略有改善,CVD 成本降低,但总费用增加,成本效益比高。通过关注有 CVD 病史的 2 型糖尿病患者的心血管危险因素,可以实现具有成本效益的护理。