Stegbauer Constance, Falivena Camilla, Moreno Ariadna, Hentschel Anna, Rosenmöller Magda, Heise Tim, Szecsenyi Joachim, Schliess Freimut
aQua Institute for Applied Quality Improvement and Research in Health Care GmbH, Maschmühlenweg 8-10, 37073, Göttingen, Lower Saxony, Germany.
Health & Not for Profit Division, CERGAS, SDA Bocconi School of Management Governments, Via Sarfatti, 10, Milan, 20136, Italy.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Nov 16;20(1):1043. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05897-w.
Type 2 diabetes represents an increasingly critical challenge for health policy worldwide. It absorbs massive resources from both patients and national economies to sustain direct costs of the treatment of type 2 diabetes and its complications and indirect costs related to work loss and wages. More recently, there are innovations based on remote control and personalised programs that promise a more cost-effective diabetes management while reducing diabetes-related complications. In such a context, this work attempts to update cost analysis reviews on type 2 diabetes, focusing on France and Germany, in order to explore most significant cost drivers and cost-saving opportunities through innovations in diabetes care. Although both countries approach care delivery differently, France and Germany represent the primary European markets for diabetes technologies.
A systematic review of the literature listed in MEDLINE, Embase and EconLit has been carried out. It covered interventional, observational and modelling studies on expenditures for type 2 diabetes management in France or Germany published since 2012. Included articles were analysed for annual direct, associated and indirect costs of type 2 diabetes patients. An appraisal of study quality was performed. Results were summarised narratively.
From 1260 records, the final sample was composed of 24 papers selected according to predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Both France and Germany revealed a predominant focus on direct costs. Comparability was limited due to different study populations and cost categories used. Indirect costs were only available in Germany. According to prior literature, reported cost drivers are hospitalisation, prescriptions, higher HbA1c and BMI, treatment with insulin and complications, all indicators of disease severity. The diversity of available data and included costs limits the results and may explain the differences found.
Complication prevention and glycaemic control are widely recognized as the most effective ways to control diabetes treatment costs. The value propositions of self-based supports, such as hybrid closed-loop metabolic systems, already implemented in type 1 diabetes management, are the key points for further debates and policymaking, which should involve the perspectives of caregivers, patients and payers.
2型糖尿病对全球卫生政策而言是一项日益严峻的挑战。它消耗了患者和国家经济的大量资源,用于维持2型糖尿病及其并发症治疗的直接成本以及与工作损失和工资相关的间接成本。最近,基于远程控制和个性化方案的创新有望实现更具成本效益的糖尿病管理,同时减少糖尿病相关并发症。在此背景下,本研究试图更新关于2型糖尿病的成本分析综述,重点关注法国和德国,以通过糖尿病护理创新探索最重要的成本驱动因素和成本节约机会。尽管两国的医疗服务提供方式不同,但法国和德国是糖尿病技术的主要欧洲市场。
对MEDLINE、Embase和EconLit中列出的文献进行了系统综述。涵盖了自2012年以来发表的关于法国或德国2型糖尿病管理支出的干预性、观察性和建模研究。对纳入的文章分析了2型糖尿病患者的年度直接、相关和间接成本。对研究质量进行了评估。结果以叙述方式进行了总结。
从1260条记录中,最终样本由根据预定义的纳入/排除标准选择的24篇论文组成。法国和德国都主要关注直接成本。由于使用的研究人群和成本类别不同,可比性有限。间接成本仅在德国有数据。根据先前的文献,报告的成本驱动因素包括住院、处方、较高的糖化血红蛋白和体重指数、胰岛素治疗及并发症,这些都是疾病严重程度的指标。可用数据和纳入成本的多样性限制了结果,并可能解释所发现的差异。
预防并发症和控制血糖被广泛认为是控制糖尿病治疗成本的最有效方法。在1型糖尿病管理中已实施的基于自我的支持措施(如混合闭环代谢系统)的价值主张,是进一步辩论和决策的关键点,这应涉及护理人员、患者和支付方的观点。