Research Unit, The Social Insurance Institution of Finland, P.O. Box 450, Helsinki, 00056 KELA, Finland.
Medical Advisory Unit, The Social Insurance Institution of Finland, Helsinki, Finland.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Aug 19;24(1):944. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11325-0.
In this nationwide register study, we examined the initiation of a second-line antidiabetic medicine (ADM) among new patients receiving regular metformin monotherapy in Finland during 2011-2022. We also reflected the second-line treatment patterns on changes in the reimbursement policy, and the national type 2 diabetes (T2D) care guidelines.
Using register data on all reimbursed ADM purchases during 2010-2022, we defined nine annual cohorts of patients initiating regular metformin monotherapy during 2011-2019, each with a three-year follow-up. Descriptive methods were used to study the patterns of metformin monotherapy and second-line intensification over time. Proportional hazards models were used to analyse the take-up of the second-line ADM.
The share of new patients initiating metformin use (11-13% of all metformin users) and regular metformin use (83-85% of all new metformin users) remained stable. In all cohorts, 16-19% of the patients took up a second-line ADM (median time to intensification 1.5 years). With the 2011 cohort as reference, the highest proportion of new regular metformin users taking up a second ADM (hazard ratio 1.12. 95% confidence interval 1.07 ; 1.16, P < .0001) was in the 2019 cohort. In the 2017 cohort, the proportion of patients initiating sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors as second-line treatment surpassed those initiating dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. The reimbursement policy restricted the use of GLP-1-analogues.
Second-line treatment intensification patterns over time paralleled the changes in the reimbursement system. Thus, our findings suggest that the reimbursement policy may influence the use of ADMs in Finland.
在这项全国性的登记研究中,我们考察了在 2011 年至 2022 年间,芬兰新接受常规二甲双胍单药治疗的患者中,开始使用二线抗糖尿病药物(ADM)的情况。我们还反映了二线治疗模式对报销政策和国家 2 型糖尿病(T2D)护理指南的变化。
我们使用 2010 年至 2022 年所有报销 ADM 购买的登记数据,定义了 2011 年至 2019 年期间开始常规二甲双胍单药治疗的九个年度患者队列,每个队列有三年的随访期。使用描述性方法研究了随时间推移二甲双胍单药治疗和二线强化的模式。使用比例风险模型分析二线 ADM 的采用情况。
新患者开始使用二甲双胍(所有使用二甲双胍患者的 11-13%)和常规使用二甲双胍(所有新使用二甲双胍患者的 83-85%)的比例保持稳定。在所有队列中,16-19%的患者使用了二线 ADM(强化的中位时间为 1.5 年)。以 2011 年队列为参照,接受二线 ADM 的新常规二甲双胍使用者比例最高(风险比 1.12,95%置信区间 1.07;1.16,P<0.0001)是在 2019 年队列中。在 2017 年队列中,起始二线治疗的患者中,钠-葡萄糖协同转运蛋白 2 抑制剂的比例超过了二肽基肽酶-4 抑制剂。报销政策限制了 GLP-1 类似物的使用。
随时间推移二线治疗强化模式与报销系统的变化平行。因此,我们的研究结果表明,报销政策可能会影响芬兰 ADM 的使用。