Screening for diabetic retinopathy with different levels of financial incentive in a randomized controlled trial.

AIMS/INTRODUCTION: To examine the impact of different levels of financial incentive in terms of fee subsidization on diabetic retinopathy screening in the private primary care setting in Hong Kong. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All general practitioners working in the private sector and registered in two electronic public databases were invited to participate. Consecutive patients with diabetes mellitus were then recruited by the participating practitioners. The recruited participants were randomly allocated to one of three screening groups with different fee levels (HK$0, HK$150 [US$19], HK$300 [US$39]) in a randomized controlled trial. Screening uptake and severity of diabetic retinopathy detected were compared. RESULTS: Out of 1,688 eligible practitioners, 105 participated and invited 402 patients, with 239 initially agreeing to participate (59.5%). After randomization, 78, 75 and 76 participants in the HK$0, HK$150 and HK$300 fee groups, respectively, reconfirmed their participation and were offered screening at the relevant fee. The uptake of screening was 79.5% (62/78), 81.3% (61/75) and 63.2% (48/76), in the HK$0, HK$150 and HK$300 groups, respectively (P < 0.018). Being in the HK$150 fee group was associated with higher uptake of screening than being in the HK$300 fee group (odds ratio 2.31, P = 0.039). No significant difference was found in the prevalence of any diabetic retinopathy (33.9%, 27.9% and 37.5%, P = 0.378) or sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy (4.8%, 8.2% and 16.7%; P = 0.092) among the groups. CONCLUSION: A screening fee of HK$150, representing approximately a half subsidy, appears to be as effective in maximizing uptake as a full subsidy (HK$0) and without deterring those at high risk of diabetic retinopathy from screening.

Cost-effectiveness of a primary care multidisciplinary Risk Assessment and Management Program for patients with diabetes mellitus (RAMP-DM) over lifetime.

PURPOSE: The multidisciplinary Risk Assessment and Management Program for patients with diabetes mellitus (RAMP-DM) was found to be cost-saving in comparison with usual primary care over 5 years' follow-up. This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of RAMP-DM over lifetime. METHODS: We built a Discrete Event Simulation model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RAMP-DM over lifespan from public health service provider's perspective. Transition probabilities among disease states were extrapolated from a cohort of 17,140 propensity score matched participants in RAMP-DM and those under usual primary care over 5-year's follow-up. The mortality of patients with specific DM-related complications was estimated from a cohort of 206,238 patients with diabetes. Health preference and direct medical costs of DM patients referred to our previous studies among Chinese DM patients. RESULTS: RAMP-DM individuals gained 0.745 QALYs and cost US$1404 less than those under usual care. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis found that RAMP-DM had 86.0% chance of being cost-saving compared to usual care under the assumptions and estimates used in the model. The probability of RAMP-DM being cost-effective compared to usual care would be over 99%, when the willingness to pay threshold is HK$20,000 (US$ 2564) or higher. CONCLUSION: RAMP-DM added to usual primary care was cost-saving in managing people with diabetes over lifetime. These findings support the integration of RAMP-DM as part of routine primary care for all patients with diabetes.

Five-Year Cost-effectiveness of the Multidisciplinary Risk Assessment and Management Programme-Diabetes Mellitus (RAMP-DM).

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of the multidisciplinary Risk Assessment and Management Programme-Diabetes Mellitus (RAMP-DM) in primary care patients with type 2 diabetes in comparison with usual primary care in a cohort with 5 years' follow-up. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study among 17,140 propensity score-matched participants in RAMP-DM and those under usual primary care. The effectiveness measures were cumulative incidences of complications and all-cause mortality over 5 years. In a bottom-up approach, we estimated the program costs of RAMP-DM and health service utilization from the public health service provider's perspective. The RAMP-DM program costs included the setup costs, ongoing intervention costs, and central administrative costs. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio by dividing the incremental costs by the incremental effectiveness of the RAMP-DM group compared with those of the usual-care group. RESULTS: There were significantly lower cumulative incidences of individual on any complications (15.34% vs. 28.65%, P < 0.001) and all-cause mortality (7.96% vs. 21.35%, P < 0.001) in the RAMP-DM group compared with the usual-care group. The mean program cost of RAMP-DM was 157 U.S. dollars (range 66-209) per participant over 5 years. The costs of health service utilization among participants in RAMP-DM group was 7,451 USD less than that of the usual-care group, resulting in a net savings of 7,294 USD per individual. CONCLUSIONS: RAMP-DM added to usual primary care was a cost-saving intervention in managing diabetes in patients over 5 years. These findings support the integration of RAMP-DM as part of routine primary care for all patients with diabetes.

Long-term effects of the multidisciplinary risk assessment and management program for patients with diabetes mellitus (RAMP-DM): a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Studies on the long-term effectiveness of multidisciplinary risk-stratification based management in Chinese population were rare. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a multidisciplinary risk assessment and management program for patients with diabetes mellitus (RAMP-DM) in reducing the risks of cardiovascular complications and all-cause mortality. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted in 18,188 propensity score matched RAMP-DM participants and subjects with diabetes under usual primary care (9,094 subjects in each group). The study endpoints were the first occurrence of coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, heart failure (HF), total cardiovascular disease (CVD) and all-cause mortality. We constructed multivariable Cox proportional hazard regressions to estimate the association between the RAMP-DM intervention and the first occurrence of study endpoints. RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 36 months. Three hundred and ninety-nine CVD events occurred in the RAMP-DM group, as compared with 608 in the control group [adjusted hazard ratio, 0.629; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.554-0.715; P < 0.001]. The total number of all-cause deaths in RAMP-DM group was less than half that of control group (202 vs 552, adjusted hazard ratio, 0.363; 95% CI, 0.308-0.428; P < 0.001). The adjusted hazard ratios of the RAMP-DM group for CHD, stroke, and HF were 0.570 (95% CI, 0.470-0.691; P < 0.001), 0.652 (95% CI, 0.546-0.780; P < 0.001), and 0.598 (95%CI, 0.446-0.802; P = 0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The RAMP-DM intervention was associated with lower incidences of individual and total cardiovascular complications, as well as all-cause mortality over 3 years follow-up. The encouraging results provided evidence to support that the structured risk-stratification management leading by a multidisciplinary clinical team was an effective approach to reduce future cardiovascular complications in people with diabetes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: NCT02034695, http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov.

How does socioeconomic development affect COPD mortality? An age-period-cohort analysis from a recently transitioned population in China.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of death, particularly in developing countries. Little is known about the effects of economic development on COPD mortality, although economic development may potentially have positive and negative influences over the life course on COPD. We took advantage of a unique population whose rapid and recent economic development is marked by changes at clearly delineated and identifiable time points, and where few women smoke, to examine the effect of macro-level events on COPD mortality. METHODS: We used Poisson regression to decompose sex-specific COPD mortality rates in Hong Kong from 1981 to 2005 into the effects of age, period and cohort. RESULTS: COPD mortality declined strongly over generations for people born from the early to mid 20th century, which was particularly evident for the first generation to grow up in a more economically developed environment for both sexes. Population wide COPD mortality decreased when air quality improved and increased with increasing air pollution. COPD mortality increased with age, particularly after menopause among women. CONCLUSIONS: Economic development may reduce vulnerability to COPD by reducing long-lasting insults to the respiratory system, such as infections, poor nutrition and indoor air pollution. However, some of these gains may be offset if economic development results in increasing air pollution or increasing smoking.