The Impact of Unrelated Future Medical Costs on Economic Evaluation Outcomes for Different Models of Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: This study leveraged data from 11 independent international diabetes models to evaluate the impact of unrelated future medical costs on the outcomes of health economic evaluations in diabetes mellitus. METHODS: Eleven models simulated the progression of diabetes and occurrence of its complications in hypothetical cohorts of individuals with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 (T2D) diabetes over the remaining lifetime of the patients to evaluate the cost effectiveness of three hypothetical glucose improvement interventions versus a hypothetical control intervention. All models used the same set of costs associated with diabetes complications and interventions, using a United Kingdom healthcare system perspective. Standard utility/disutility values associated with diabetes-related complications were used. Unrelated future medical costs were assumed equal for all interventions and control arms. The statistical significance of changes on the total lifetime costs, incremental costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) before and after adding the unrelated future medical costs were analysed using t-test and summarized in incremental cost-effectiveness diagrams by type of diabetes. RESULTS: The inclusion of unrelated costs increased mean total lifetime costs substantially. However, there were no significant differences between the mean incremental costs and ICERs before and after adding unrelated future medical costs. Unrelated future medical cost inclusion did not alter the original conclusions of the diabetes modelling evaluations. CONCLUSIONS: For diabetes, with many costly noncommunicable diseases already explicitly modelled as complications, and with many interventions having predominantly an effect on the improvement of quality of life, unrelated future medical costs have a small impact on the outcomes of health economic evaluations.

Cost-effectiveness of the tandem t: Slim X2 with control-IQ technology automated insulin delivery system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes in Sweden.

AIMS: The present analysis estimated the cost-effectiveness of treatment with the Tandem t: slim X2 insulin pump with Control IQ technology (CIQ) in children with type 1 diabetes in Sweden. METHODS: A four-state Markov model and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were used to assess the cost-effectiveness of CIQ use compared with treatment with multiple daily insulin injections (MDI) or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) in conjunction with CGM. Data sources included clinical input data from a recent retrospective, observational study, cost data from local diabetes supply companies and government agencies, and published literature. Outcomes measures were quality adjusted life years (QALYs) at 10, 20 and 30-year time horizons based on cost per QALY and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: A total of 84 type 1 diabetes children were included (CIQ, n = 37; MDI, n = 19; CSII, n = 28). For all time horizons, the use of CIQ was a dominant strategy (e.g. more effective and less costly) compared with MDI or CSII use: 10-year ICER, SEK -88,010.37 and SEK -91,723.92; 20-year ICER, SEK -72,095.33 and SEK -87,707.79; and 30-year ICER, SEK -65,573.01 and SEK -85,495.68, respectively. PSA confirmed that CIQ use was less costly compared with MDI and CSII. CONCLUSIONS: Initiation of CIQ use in children with type 1 diabetes is cost-saving, besides previously shown improved glycaemic control, and increased quality of life. Further investigations are needed to more fully elucidate the cost-effectiveness of these technologies in different countries with existing differences in payment models.

Changes in the Epidemiological Landscape of Diabetes in South Korea: Trends in Prevalence, Incidence, and Healthcare Expenditures.

Diabetes is a serious public health concern that significantly contributes to the global burden of disease. In Korea, the prevalence of diabetes is 12.5% among individuals aged 19 and older, and 14.8% among individuals aged 30 and older as of 2022. The total number of people with diabetes among those aged 19 and older is estimated to be 5.4 million. The incidence of diabetes decreased from 8.1 per 1,000 persons in 2006 to 6.3 per 1,000 persons in 2014, before rising again to 7.5 per 1,000 persons in 2019. Meanwhile, the incidence of type 1 diabetes increased significantly, from 1.1 per 100,000 persons in 1995 to 4.8 per 100,000 persons in 2016, with the prevalence reaching 41.0 per 100,000 persons in 2017. Additionally, the prevalence of gestational diabetes saw a substantial rise from 4.1% in 2007 to 22.3% in 2023. These changes have resulted in increases in the total medical costs for diabetes, covering both outpatient and inpatient services. Therefore, effective diabetes prevention strategies are urgently needed.

Single-arm, first-in-human feasibility study results for an ultra-low-cost insulin pump.

BACKGROUND: Use of Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion (CSII) has been shown to improve glycemic outcomes in Type 1 Diabetes (T1D), but high costs limit accessibility. To address this issue, an inter-operable, open-source Ultra-Low-Cost Insulin Pump (ULCIP) was developed and previously shown to demonstrate comparable delivery accuracy to commercial models in standardised laboratory tests. This study aims to evaluate the updated ULCIP in-vivo, assessing its viability as an affordable alternative for those who cannot afford commercially available devices. METHODS: This first-in-human feasibility study recruited six participants with T1D. During a nine-hour inpatient stay, participants used the ULCIP under clinical supervision. Venous glucose, insulin, and ß-Hydroxybutyrate were monitored to assess device performance. RESULTS: Participants displayed expected blood glucose and blood insulin levels in response to programmed basal and bolus insulin dosing. One participant developed mild ketosis, which was treated and did not recur when a new pump reservoir was placed. All other participants maintained ß-Hydroxybutyrate < 0.6 mmol/L throughout. CONCLUSION: The ULCIP safely delivered insulin therapy to users in a supervised inpatient environment. Future work should focus on correcting a pump hardware issue identified in this trial and extending device capabilities for use in closed loop control. Longer-term outpatient studies are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12623001288617) on the 11 December 2023.

State Out-Of-Pocket Caps On Insulin Costs: No Significant Increase In Claims Or Utilization.

Nearly all patients with type 1 diabetes and 20-30 percent of patients with type 2 diabetes use insulin to manage glycemic control. Approximately one-quarter of patients who use insulin report underuse because of cost. In response, more than twenty states have implemented monthly caps on insulin out-of-pocket spending, ranging from $25 to $100. Using a difference-in-differences approach, this study evaluated whether state-level caps on insulin out-of-pocket spending change insulin usage among commercially insured enrollees. The study included 33,134 people ages 18-64 who had type 1 diabetes or who used insulin to manage type 2 diabetes with commercial insurance coverage that was subject to state-level oversight and was included in the 25 percent sample of the IQVIA PharMetrics database during 2018-21. Insulin out-of-pocket caps did not significantly increase quarterly insulin claims for enrollees who had type 1 diabetes or who used insulin to manage type 2 diabetes. State-level caps on insulin out-of-pocket spending for commercial enrollees did not significantly increase insulin use; that may be in part because of out-of-pocket expenses being lower than cap amounts.

Adolescent-Preferred financial incentives to promote type 1 diabetes Self-Care: A discrete choice experiment.

AIMS: This study aimed to quantify preferences for the characteristics of a financial incentives program that would motivate adolescent engagement in type 1 diabetes (T1D) self-care. METHOD: We performed a discrete choice experiment with 12-18 year-olds with T1D from two pediatric hospital endocrinology clinics (n = 317). We identified key attributes of incentives: (1) monthly value of the reward, (2) payment structure, and (3) difficulty of incentivized behaviors. In twelve choice questions, adolescents chose the incentive option from a pair of profiles that was more likely to motivate them to increase adherence to recommended self-care. Options presented were tailored to adolescents' T1D technology use and perceived difficulty of completing each behavior. We analyzed data using a conditional logit model. RESULTS: The value of the reward accounted for 60.8% of preferences. Adolescents were willing to accept lower value rewards when incentive payments used positive vs. negative reinforcement (-$10.88 (95% CI: -$12.60, -9.24)) and preferred higher incentives for performing hard vs. easier behaviors (+$14.92 (95% CI: +$12.66, +$17.28)). CONCLUSIONS: Stated preferences can inform intervention design. Future research will evaluate the external validity of the discrete choice experiment-informed intervention design by assessing adolescent health and behavioral outcomes in a randomized controlled trial.

Use of Financial Incentives to Promote Adolescent Type 1 Diabetes Self-management: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether financial incentives lead to improvement in self-management behaviors and glycemia in adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Adolescents (12- to 18-year-olds) with T1D selected incentivized self-management behavior and clinical outcome goals in a three-treatment (gain frame, loss frame, no incentives) crossover randomized controlled trial. Participants could earn up to $180 in each 12-week incentive treatment arm. RESULTS: Compared with a mean 41% behavioral goal attainment within the nonfinancial incentives arm, mean behavioral goal attainment under gain and loss frames was 50% (P < 0.01) and 45% (P < 0.01), respectively. Mean time in range (TIR) in gain frame and loss frame arms was higher 43% (P < 0.01) and 42% (P < 0.01), respectively, compared with when not receiving financial incentives (38%). There was no difference in A1C among the three arms. CONCLUSIONS: Financial incentives can improve diabetes self-management behaviors and TIR in adolescents with T1D in the short-term.

Health Outcome Changes in Individuals With Type 1 Diabetes After a State-Level Insulin Copayment Cap.

Importance: Many insulin users ration doses due to high out-of-pocket costs. Starting January 2020 with Colorado, 25 states and the District of Columbia enacted laws that cap insulin copayments. Objective: To estimate the association of Colorado's $100 copayment cap with out-of-pocket spending, medication adherence, and health care services utilization for diabetes-related complications. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study using Colorado's All-Payer Claims Database, nonelderly insulin users with type 1 diabetes were analyzed from January 2019 to December 2020. Outcome changes were compared in the prepolicy and postpolicy period among individuals continuously enrolled in state-regulated and non-state-regulated plans using difference-in-differences regressions. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on individuals' prepolicy spending (low: never ≥$100 out-of-pocket vs high: ≥$100 out-of-pocket cost at least once). Data were analyzed from June 2023 to May 2024. Exposure: Enrollment in state-regulated health insurance plans subject to the copayment cap legislation. Main Outcomes and Measures: Adherence to basal and bolus insulin treatment was evaluated using the proportion of days covered measure, out-of-pocket spending reflected prescription cost for a 30-day supply, and health care utilization for diabetes-related complications was identified using primary diagnosis codes from medical claims data. Results: The panel included 1629 individuals with type 1 diabetes (39 096 person-months), of which 924 were male (56.7%), 540 (33.1%) had 1 or more comorbidities, and the mean (SD) age was 40.6 (15.9) years. Overall, the copayment cap was associated with out-of-pocket spending declines of $17.3 (95% CI, -$27.3 to -$7.3) for basal and $11.5 (95% CI, -$24.7 to $1.7) for bolus insulins and increases in adherence of 3.2 (95% CI, 0.0 to 6.5) percentage points for basal and 3.3 (95% CI, 0.3 to 6.4) percentage points for bolus insulins. Changes in adherence were associated with increases within the prepolicy high-spending group (basal, 9.9; 95% CI, 2.4 to 17.4 percentage points; bolus, 13.0; 95% CI, 5.1 to 20.9 percentage points). The policy was also associated with a mean reduction of -0.09 (95% CI, -0.16 to -0.02) medical claims for diabetes-related complications per person per month among high spenders, a 30% decrease. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of Colorado's insulin copayment cap among individuals with type 1 diabetes, the policy was associated with an overall decline in out-of-pocket spending, an increase in medication adherence, and a decline in claims for diabetes-related complications only among insulin users who spent more than $100 in the prepolicy period at least once.

Projecting the economic burden of type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus in Germany from 2010 until 2040.

BACKGROUND: The aim is to estimate age- and sex-specific direct medical costs related to diagnosed type 1 and type 2 diabetes in Germany between 2010 and 2040. METHODS: Based on nationwide representative epidemiological routine data from 2010 from the statutory health insurance in Germany (almost 80% of the population's insurance) we projected age- and sex-specific healthcare expenses for type 1 and 2 diabetes considering future demographic, disease-specific and cost trends. We combine per capita healthcare cost data (obtained from aggregated claims data from an almost 7% random sample of all German people with statutory health insurance) together with the demographic structure of the German population (obtained from the Federal Statictical Office), diabetes prevalence, incidence and mortality. Direct per capita costs, total annual costs, cost ratios for people with versus without diabetes and attributable costs were estimated. The source code for running the analysis is publicly available in the open-access repository Zenodo. RESULTS: In 2010, total healthcare costs amounted to more than €1 billion for type 1 and €28 billion for type 2 diabetes. Depending on the scenario, total annual expenses were projected to rise remarkably until 2040 compared to 2010, by 1-281% for type 1 (€1 to €4 billion) and by 8-364% for type 2 diabetes (€30 to €131 billion). In a relatively probable scenario total costs amount to about €2 and €79 billion for type 1 and type 2 diabetes in 2040, respectively. Depending on annual cost growth (1% p.a. as realistic scenario vs. 5% p.a. as very extreme setting), we estimated annual per capita costs of €6,581 to €12,057 for type 1 and €5,245 to €8,999 for type 2 diabetes in 2040. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes imposes a large economic burden on Germany which is projected to increase substantially until 2040. Temporal trends in the incidence and cost growth are main drivers of this increase. This highlight the need for urgent action to prepare for the potential development and mitigate its consequences.

Relationship between the cost of illness and quality of life among adolescents with type 1 diabetes-a mixed method study.

Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is a major problem worldwide that affects the quality of life, well-being of patients and their families. This study aimed to determine the relationship between the cost of illness and quality of life among patients with T1DM. A concurrent, parallel, mixed-method study of 113 adolescents with T1DM registered in public and private hospitals in the Mysore district was conducted by obtaining data related to the cost of illness and quality of life using a validated Diabetes-Specific Quality of Life (DSQoL) questionnaire. Thematic analysis was used to identify the themes. There was a significant association amonghealth insurance status, treatment facility type, catastrophic health expenditure (CHE), and cost of illness. The CHE proportion was32.7%. Financial sources for treatment were met primarily by borrowing money with interest (58 patients, 51.3%), followed by individualincome (40 patients, 35.3%), contributions from friends and relatives (10 patients, 8.8%), and selling of assets (5 patients, 4.4%). The monthly health expenditures of approximately 22 (19.46%) households were greater than their monthly incomes. There was a positive correlation (rvalue of 0.979) between the cost of treatment and the DSQoL score, and this correlation was statistically significant, with a p value < 0.001. The higher theDSQoL score was, the worse the quality of life and the worse the well-being of T1DM patients. Three themes were identified: the impact of financial cost on family coping, the impact of financial cost on seeking care and the emotional burden of financial cost. There was a statistically significant positive correlation between the cost of treatment and the DSQoLscore. Adolescents with T1DM who had greatertreatment costs had worseDSQoL, and significantly lower health expenses were observed among adolescentswho had health insurance. Cost of illness acts as a barrier to treatment and placesa burden on patients and their families.

Continuous glucose monitoring vs. self-monitoring in pregnant individuals with type 1 diabetes: an economic analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, approximately 1% of pregnancies are complicated by pregestational diabetes. Individuals with type 1 diabetes have an increased risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. While continuous glucose monitoring has demonstrated benefits for patients with type 1 diabetes, its cost is higher than traditional intermittent fingerstick monitoring, particularly if used only during pregnancy. OBJECTIVE: To develop an economic analysis model to compare in silico the cost of continuous glucose monitoring and self-monitoring of blood glucose in a cohort of pregnant individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus. STUDY DESIGN: We developed an economic analysis model to compare two glucose monitoring strategies in pregnant individuals with type 1 diabetes: continuous glucose monitoring and self-monitoring. The model considered hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, large for gestational age, cesarean delivery, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, and neonatal hypoglycemia. The primary outcome was the total cost per strategy in 2022 USD from a health system perspective, with self-monitoring as the reference group. Probabilities, relative risks, and costs were extracted from the literature, and the costs were adjusted to 2022 US dollars. Sensitivity analyses were conducted by varying parameters based on the probability, relative risk, and cost distributions. The robustness of the results was tested through 1000 Monte Carlo simulations. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, the cost of pregnancy using continuous glucose monitoring was $26,837 compared to $29,039 for self-monitoring, resulting in a cost reduction of $2,202 per individual. The parameters with the greatest effect on the incremental cost included the relative risk of NICU admission, cost of NICU admission, continuous glucose monitoring costs, and usual care costs. Monte Carlo simulations indicated that continuous glucose monitoring was the optimal strategy 98.7% of the time. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that continuous glucose monitoring was more economical if the relative risk of NICU admission with continuous glucose monitoring vs. self-monitoring was below 1.15. CONCLUSION: Compared to self-monitoring, continuous glucose monitoring is an economical strategy for pregnant individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

Estimation of the direct health and indirect societal costs of diabetes in the UK using a cost of illness model.

AIMS: The direct cost of diabetes to the UK health system was estimated at around £10 billion in 2012. This analysis updates that estimate using more recent and accurate data sources. METHODS: A pragmatic review of relevant data sources for UK nations was conducted, including population-level data sets and published literature, to generate estimates of costs separately for Type 1, Type 2 and gestational diabetes. A comprehensive cost framework, developed in collaboration with experts, was used to create a population-based cost of illness model. The key driver of the analysis was prevalence of diabetes and its complications. Estimates were made of the excess costs of diagnosis, treatment and diabetes-related complications compared with the general UK population. Estimates of the indirect costs of diabetes focused on productivity losses due to absenteeism and premature mortality. RESULTS: The direct costs of diabetes in 2021/22 for the UK were estimated at £10.7 billion, of which just over 40% related to diagnosis and treatment, with the rest relating to the excess costs of complications. Indirect costs were estimated at £3.3 billion. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes remains a considerable cost burden in the UK, and the majority of those costs are still spent on potentially preventable complications. Although rates of some complications are reducing, prevalence continues to increase and effective approaches to primary and secondary prevention continue to be needed. Improvements in data capture, data quality and reporting, and further research on the human and financial implications of increasing incidence of Type 2 diabetes in younger people are recommended.

Evaluating the Cost-Utility of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Individuals with Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review of the Methods and Quality of Studies Using Decision Models or Empirical Data.

INTRODUCTION: This review presents a critical appraisal of differences in the methodologies and quality of model-based and empirical data-based cost-utility studies on continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in type 1 diabetes (T1D) populations. It identifies key limitations and challenges in health economic evaluations on CGM and opportunities for their improvement. METHODS: The review and its documentation adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for systematic reviews. Searches for articles published between January 2000 and January 2023 were conducted using the MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Econlit databases. Published studies using models and empirical data to evaluate the cost utility of all CGM devices used by T1D patients were included in the search. Two authors independently extracted data on interventions, populations, model settings (e.g., perspectives and time horizons), model types and structures, clinical outcomes used to populate the model, validation, and uncertainty analyses. They subsequently met to confirm consensus. Quality was assessed using the Philips checklist for model-based studies and the Consensus Health Economic Criteria (CHEC) checklist for empirical studies. Model validation was assessed using the Assessment of the Validation Status of Health-Economic decision models (AdViSHE) checklist. The extracted data were used to generate summary tables and figures. The study protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023391284). RESULTS: In total, 34 studies satisfied the selection criteria, two of which only used empirical data. The remaining 32 studies applied 10 different models, with a substantial majority adopting the CORE Diabetes Model. Model-based studies often lacked transparency, as their assumptions regarding the extrapolation of treatment effects beyond available evidence from clinical studies and the selection and processing of the input data were not explicitly stated. Initial scores for disagreements concerning checklists were relatively high, especially for the Philips checklist. Following their resolution, overall quality scores were moderate at 56%, whereas model validation scores were mixed. Strikingly, costing approaches differed widely across studies, resulting in little consistency in the elements included in intervention costs. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The overall quality of studies evaluating CGM was moderate. Potential areas of improvement include developing systematic approaches for data selection, improving uncertainty analyses, clearer reporting, and explaining choices for particular modeling approaches. Few studies provided the assurance that all relevant and feasible options had been compared, which is required by decision makers, especially for rapidly evolving technologies such as CGM and insulin administration. High scores for disagreements indicated that several checklists contained questions that were difficult to interpret consistently for quality assessment. Therefore, simpler but comprehensive quality checklists may be needed for model-based health economic evaluation studies.

Receipt of Diabetes Specialty Care and Management Services by Older Adults With Diabetes in the U.S., 2015-2019: An Analysis of Medicare Fee-for-Service Claims.

OBJECTIVE: We characterized the receipt of diabetes specialty care and management services among older adults with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Using a 20% random sample of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years, we analyzed cohorts of type 1 diabetes (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) with history of severe hypoglycemia (HoH), and all other T2D annually from 2015 to 2019. Outcomes were receipt of office-based endocrinology care, diabetes education, outpatient diabetes health services, excluding those provided in primary care, and any of the aforementioned services. RESULTS: In the T1D cohort, receipt of endocrinology care and any service increased from 25.9% and 29.2% in 2015 to 32.7% and 37.4% in 2019, respectively. In the T2D with HoH cohort, receipt of endocrinology care and any service was 13.9% and 16.4% in 2015, with minimal increases. Age, race/ethnicity, residential setting, and income were associated with receiving care. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that many older adults may not receive specialty diabetes care and underscore health disparities.

Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Versus Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes in Iran.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine long-term cost-effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology versus self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using multiple daily injections in Iran. METHODS: According to available data, the long-term costs and clinical outcomes of CGM and SMBG were estimated using the Sheffield Type 1 Diabetes Model, with a lifetime horizon from a payer's perspective. The primary outcome was the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. RESULTS: The lifetime cost-effectiveness analysis demonstrated that on average, the use of CGM increased life expectancy by 1.32 years and QALYs by 1.63, compared with SMBG. The CGM group had an average discounted total cost of $40 093 US dollars, whereas the SMBG group had an average discounted total cost of $13 366. This resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $16 386 per QALY gained, which is less than the threshold of 3 times the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita of Iran ($24 561). CONCLUSIONS: Considering 3 times the GDP per capita as the threshold, CGM is likely to be cost-effective in Iran. However, for CGM to be very cost-effective (ie, have an ICER less than 1 times the GDP per capita) and presumably more accessible, the price of CGM should decrease to $40 per sensor, each with a lifespan of 14 days.

Health Care Utilization and Direct Costs Prior to Subspecialty Care in Children with Chronic Pain Compared with Other Chronic Childhood Diseases: A Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To understand the burden associated with pediatric chronic pain (CP) on the health care system compared with other costly chronic diseases prior to subspecialty care. STUDY DESIGN: In this retrospective cohort study, we assessed all-cause health care utilization and direct health care costs associated with pediatric CP (n = 91) compared with juvenile arthritis (n = 135), inflammatory bowel disease (n = 90), type 1 diabetes (n = 475) or type 2 diabetes (n = 289), anxiety (n = 7193), and controls (n = 273) 2 and 5 years prior to patients entering subspecialty care in Manitoba, Canada. Linked data from physician encounters, emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and prescriptions were extracted from administrative databases. Differences in health care utilization and direct health care costs associated with CP vs the other conditions were tested using negative binomial and zero-inflated negative binomial regression models, respectively. RESULTS: After adjustment for age at diagnosis, sex, location of residence, and socioeconomic status, CP continued to be associated with the highest number of consulted physicians and subspecialists and the highest number of physician billings compared with all other conditions (P < .01, respectively). CP was significantly associated with higher physician costs than juvenile arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, or controls (P < .01, respectively); anxiety was associated with the highest physician and prescription costs among all cohorts (P < .01, respectively). CONCLUSION: Compared with chronic inflammatory and endocrinologic conditions, pediatric CP and anxiety were associated with substantial burden on the health care system prior to subspecialty care, suggesting a need to assess gaps and resources in the management of CP and mental health conditions in the primary care setting.

Cost-effectiveness of a Novel Hypoglycaemia Programme: The 'HARPdoc vs BGAT' RCT.

AIMS: To assess the cost-effectiveness of HARPdoc (Hypoglycaemia Awareness Restoration Programme for adults with type 1 diabetes and problematic hypoglycaemia despite optimised care), focussed upon cognitions and motivation, versus BGAT (Blood Glucose Awareness Training), focussed on behaviours and education, as adjunctive treatments for treatment-resistant problematic hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes, in a randomised controlled trial. METHODS: Eligible adults were randomised to either intervention. Quality of life (QoL, measured using EQ-5D-5L); cost of utilisation of health services (using the adult services utilization schedule, AD-SUS) and of programme implementation and curriculum delivery were measured. A cost-utility analysis was undertaken using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as a measure of trial participant outcome and cost-effectiveness was evaluated with reference to the incremental net benefit (INB) of HARPdoc compared to BGAT. RESULTS: Over 24 months mean total cost per participant was £194 lower for HARPdoc compared to BGAT (95% CI: -£2498 to £1942). HARPdoc was associated with a mean incremental gain of 0.067 QALYs/participant over 24 months post-randomisation: an equivalent gain of 24 days in full health. The mean INB of HARPdoc compared to BGAT over 24 months was positive: £1521/participant, indicating comparative cost-effectiveness, with an 85% probability of correctly inferring an INB > 0. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing health cognitions in people with treatment-resistant hypoglycaemia achieved cost-effectiveness compared to an alternative approach through improved QoL and reduced need for medical services, including hospital admissions. Compared to BGAT, HARPdoc offers a cost-effective adjunct to educational and technological solutions for problematic hypoglycaemia.

The Cost-Effectiveness of an Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System Compared to Standard Management of Type 1 Diabetes in a Singapore Setting.

Background: Despite advances in technology, glycemic outcomes in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) remain suboptimal. The MiniMed 780G (MM780G) advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system is the latest technology for T1D management with established safety and efficacy. This study explores the cost-effectiveness of MM780G AHCL compared against multiple daily injections (MDI) plus intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitor (isCGM). Methods: A cost-utility analysis was conducted, simulating lifetime outcomes for 1000 T1D individuals, with baseline hemoglobin A1c of 8.4%, using the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model (CDM) v9.5. A Singapore health care payer perspective was taken with 2023 costs applied. Treatment effects were taken from the ADAPT study and treatment-related events from a combination of sources. T1D complication costs were derived from local literature, and health state utilities and disutilities from published literature. Scenario analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSAs) explored uncertainty. Cost-effectiveness was assessed based on willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds set to Singapore Dollars (SGD) 45,000 (United States Dollars [USD] 33,087) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and Singapore's gross domestic product (GDP) per capita of SGD 114,165 (USD 83,941) per QALY. Results: A switch from MDI plus isCGM to MM780G resulted in expected gains in life-years (+0.78) and QALYs (+1.45). Cost savings through reduction in T1D complications (SGD 25,465; USD 18,723) partially offset the higher treatment costs in the AHCL arm (+SGD 74,538; +USD 54,805), resulting in an estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of SGD 33,797 (USD 24,850) per QALY gained. Findings were robust, with PSA outputs indicating 81% and 99% probabilities of cost-effectiveness at the stated WTP thresholds. Conclusion: MM780G is a cost-effective option for people with T1D managed in a Singapore setting.