Bierwirth Ralph Achim, Kohlmann Thomas, Moock Jörn, Holle Rolf, Landgraf Wolfgang
Ambulantes Diabeteszentrum am Elisabeth-Krankenhaus, Essen, Germany.
Med Klin (Munich). 2010 Nov;105(11):792-801. doi: 10.1007/s00063-010-1136-1. Epub 2010 Dec 7.
Costs for diabetes treatment burden statutory health care systems. Aim of the LIVE-COM study (Long Acting Insulin Glargine versus Insulin Detemir Cost Evaluation Comparison) was to assess resource utilization and costs of diabetes care as well as patient reported outcomes in a random sample of type 2 diabetes patients treated with either insulin glargine (GLA) or detemir (DET) as part of a basal-bolus regimen in a primary care setting.
LIVE-COM is a non-interventional, cross-sectional study performed between April and September 2008 in 138 randomly selected centers of primary care physicians in Germany. From 1731 type 2 diabetes patients (GLA: n = 1150; DET: n = 581) with statutory health insurance status and pretreatment with either GLA or DET for at least 6 months as part of a basal-bolus therapy, total direct costs of diabetes care (for insulins, oral antidiabetic drugs, test strips, needles, lancets, Hypokits®) were calculated from total recorded expenditures, for a period of six months, from the perspective of statutory health insurance. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using validated questionnaires (SF-12, DTSQs, ITEQ).
Mean total costs per patient over six months were lower with GLA based therapy compared with DET based therapy (972 euro ± 374 euro vs. 1135 euro ± 477 euro, p < 0.001). Adjusted by ANCOVA: 932 euro (95% CI: 905, 957 euro) vs. 1.061 euro (95% CI: 1025, 1099 euro, p < 0.001). The adjusted mean single costs for basal insulin (223 euro vs. 246 euro), bolus insulin (241 euro vs. 289 euro), test strips (347 euro vs. 393 euro) and needles (67 euro vs. 80 euro) were significantly lower in the GLA group (p < 0.001, each), whereas costs of OAD (36 euro vs. 35 euro), lancets (14 euro vs. 15 euro) and Hypokits® (1.9 euro vs. 1.0 euro) did not differ significantly. Glycemic parameters (HbA1c, fasting blood glucose) were better on GLA based therapy (p < 0.01) and associated with lower daily total insulin doses (68 U vs. 79 U). Furthermore, slightly better results in patient-reported outcomes were found in GLA patients.
In a head-to-head comparison over six months a glargine vs. detemir based basal-bolus therapy in type 2 diabetes patients was associated with lower total costs of diabetes care Δ: -128 euro/patient) mainly caused by savings of consumables. Further health services research with larger sample sizes should be conducted to obtain a more comprehensive analysis of economic aspects of insulin analogs or other innovative drugs in routine practice.
糖尿病治疗费用给法定医疗保健系统带来负担。LIVE-COM研究(甘精胰岛素与地特胰岛素成本评估比较)的目的是,在基层医疗环境中,对接受甘精胰岛素(GLA)或地特胰岛素(DET)作为基础-餐时胰岛素治疗方案一部分的2型糖尿病患者随机样本,评估糖尿病护理的资源利用和成本以及患者报告的结局。
LIVE-COM是一项非干预性横断面研究,于2008年4月至9月在德国138个随机选择的基层医疗医生中心进行。从1731例有法定医疗保险身份且作为基础-餐时治疗一部分,已使用GLA或DET进行至少6个月预处理的2型糖尿病患者(GLA组:n = 1150;DET组:n = 581)中,从法定医疗保险的角度,根据记录的总支出计算6个月期间糖尿病护理的总直接成本(包括胰岛素、口服降糖药、试纸、针头、采血针、Hypokits®)。使用经过验证的问卷(SF-12、DTSQs、ITEQ)评估患者报告的结局。
与基于DET的治疗相比,基于GLA的治疗使每位患者6个月的平均总成本更低(972欧元±374欧元对1135欧元±477欧元,p < 0.001)。经协方差分析调整后:932欧元(95%CI:905,957欧元)对1061欧元(95%CI:1025,1099欧元,p < 0.001)。GLA组基础胰岛素(223欧元对246欧元)、餐时胰岛素(241欧元对289欧元)、试纸(347欧元对393欧元)和针头(67欧元对80欧元)的调整后平均单项成本显著更低(均p < 0.001),而口服降糖药(36欧元对35欧元)、采血针(14欧元对15欧元)和Hypokits®(1.9欧元对1.0欧元)的成本无显著差异。基于GLA的治疗血糖参数(糖化血红蛋白、空腹血糖)更佳(p < 0.01),且每日胰岛素总剂量更低(68 U对79 U)。此外,GLA组患者报告结局的结果略优。
在2型糖尿病患者中,为期6个月的甘精胰岛素与地特胰岛素基础-餐时治疗的直接比较显示,糖尿病护理总成本更低(差值:-128欧元/患者),主要原因是耗材节省。应开展更大样本量的进一步卫生服务研究,以更全面地分析胰岛素类似物或其他创新药物在常规实践中的经济方面。