Egede Leonard E, Dismuke Clara E, Walker Rebekah J, Williams Joni S, Eiler Christian
Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Center for Advancing Population Science, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Health Equity. 2021 Jul 26;5(1):503-511. doi: 10.1089/heq.2020.0134. eCollection 2021.
The objective of this study was to examine whether delivering technology-assisted case management (TACM) with medication titration by nurses under physician supervision is cost effective compared with usual care (standard office procedures) in low-income rural adults with type 2 diabetes. One hundred and thirteen low-income, rural adults with type 2 diabetes and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥8%, were randomized to a TACM intervention or usual care. Effectiveness was measured as differences in HbA1c between the TACM and usual care groups at 6 months. Total cost per patient included intervention or usual care cost, medical care cost, and income loss associated with lost workdays. The total cost per patient and HbA1c were used to estimate a joint distribution of incremental cost and incremental effect of TACM compared with usual care. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated to summarize the cost-effectiveness of the TACM intervention relative to usual care to decrease HbA1c by 1%. Costs due to intervention, primary care, other health care, emergency room visits, and workdays missed showed statistically significant differences between the groups (usual care $1,360.49 vs. TACM $5,379.60, =0.004), with an absolute cost difference of $4,019.11. Based on the intervention cost per patient and the change in HbA1c, the median bootstrapped ICERs was estimated to be $6,299.04 (standard error=731.71) per 1% decrease in HbA1c. Based on these results, a 1% decrease in HbA1c can be obtained with the TACM intervention at an approximate cost of $6,300; therefore, it is a cost-effective option for treating vulnerable populations of adults with type 2 diabetes.
本研究的目的是检验,对于低收入的农村2型糖尿病成年人,在医生监督下由护士进行技术辅助病例管理(TACM)并进行药物滴定,与常规护理(标准门诊程序)相比是否具有成本效益。113名低收入的农村2型糖尿病成年人,糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)≥8%,被随机分为TACM干预组或常规护理组。有效性通过6个月时TACM组和常规护理组之间HbA1c的差异来衡量。每位患者的总成本包括干预或常规护理成本、医疗成本以及与工作日损失相关的收入损失。使用每位患者的总成本和HbA1c来估计TACM与常规护理相比的增量成本和增量效果的联合分布。估计增量成本效益比(ICER)以总结TACM干预相对于常规护理降低1% HbA1c的成本效益。干预、初级保健、其他医疗保健、急诊室就诊和缺勤工作日的成本在两组之间显示出统计学上的显著差异(常规护理1360.49美元 vs. TACM 5379.60美元,P = 0.004),绝对成本差异为4019.11美元。根据每位患者的干预成本和HbA1c的变化,估计自抽样得到的ICER中位数为每降低1% HbA1c 6299.04美元(标准误 = 731.71)。基于这些结果,TACM干预可以以大约6300美元的成本使HbA1c降低1%;因此,对于治疗弱势成年2型糖尿病患者群体而言,这是一个具有成本效益的选择。