A cost-effectiveness analysis of sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy and automated insulin suspension versus standard pump therapy for hypoglycemic unaware patients with type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy with "Low Glucose Suspend" (LGS) functionality versus standard pump therapy with self-monitoring of blood glucose in patients with type 1 diabetes who have impaired awareness of hypoglycemia. METHODS: A clinical trial-based economic evaluation was performed in which the net costs and effectiveness of the two treatment modalities were calculated and expressed as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The clinical outcome of interest for the evaluation was the rate of severe hypoglycemia in each arm of the LGS study. Quality-of-life utility scores were calculated using the three-level EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire. Resource use costs were estimated using public sources. RESULTS: After 6 months, the use of sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy with LGS significantly reduced the incidence of severe hypoglycemia compared with standard pump therapy (incident rate difference 1.85 [0.17-3.53]; P = 0.037). Based on a primary randomized study, the ICER per severe hypoglycemic event avoided was $18,257 for all patients and $14,944 for those aged 12 years and older. Including all major medical resource costs (e.g., hospital admissions), the ICERs were $17,602 and $14,289, respectively. Over the 6-month period, the cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained was $40,803 for patients aged 12 years and older. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the Australian experience evaluating new interventions across a broad range of therapeutic areas, sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy with LGS may be considered a cost-effective alternative to standard pump therapy with self-monitoring of blood glucose in hypoglycemia unaware patients with type 1 diabetes.

The cost of relapse in schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to quantify the costs and resource utilization associated with a relapse of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. METHODS: The study comprised a retrospective audit of data from 200 patients diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who were admitted to hospital for a relapse of their disorder in two mental health services in Australia between 1 June 2001 and 31 May 2002. Resource use and costing data were collected for 12 months before and 12 months after the hospitalization. RESULTS: There was an increase in contacts per month and associated outpatient costs after the index admission which persisted for the full 12 month data collection period (total of AUD $637). There was also a total increase in hospital costs but this did not persist beyond the first 2 months of the follow-up period and is likely explained by the index admission. CONCLUSIONS: Increased healthcare resource utilization and costs results from relapse in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. An increase in service use and costs persist for a considerable time period after an episode of relapse.

Describing cognitive decline of patients at the mild or moderate stages of Alzheimer's disease using the Standardized MMSE.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the progression of patients with mild or moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD) to a severe stage using the Standardized Mini-Mental State Examination (SMMSE). METHODS: A cohort of 206 patients was stratified according to their baseline SMMSE scores: mild (19-24) and moderate (10-18). Proportional hazards analyses were used to determine the hazard of switching into a severe stage, defined as SMMSE score < 10. RESULTS: Among patients at the mild stage, 25% reached the severe stage within 2.6 years, and in the moderate group within 1.5 years. Patients with hallucinations at the mild stage experienced more rapid decline. The previous rate of decline was also found to be an important predictor. At the moderate stage, key predictors were lower SMMSE score and longer time since onset. CONCLUSIONS: Current SMMSE scores with other clinical details can be used to advise patients and caregivers about the expected progression of AD.

Risk of weight gain associated with antipsychotic treatment: results from the Canadian National Outcomes Measurement Study in Schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Antipsychotic-induced weight gain occurs in a substantial percentage of treated persons. There remains a paucity of naturalistic data that describe relative weight-gain liability with the available novel atypical antipsychotics (NAPs). This investigation describes comparative NAP-induced weight gain in a prospective naturalistic cohort of persons with schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders. METHODS: The Canadian National Outcomes Measurement Study in Schizophrenia (CNOMSS) is an ongoing prospective, longitudinal, naturalistic study involving 32 academic and community sites across Canada. Persons with DSM-IV-defined schizophrenia, schizophreniform or schizoaffective disorder, and psychosis not otherwise specified were consecutively enrolled. The overarching objectives of this initiative were to collect and compare global effectiveness, tolerability, safety, and humanistic outcomes in persons receiving commercially available NAPs in Canada. This analysis reports only weight change with the respective NAPs. Other outcomes were reported in separate companion papers. RESULTS: A spectrum of weight-gain liability was noted with quetiapine (QUE) (mean 7.55 kg, SD 9.20; P = 0.28), olanzapine (OLZ) (mean 3.72 kg, SD 0.56; P = 0.15), and risperidone (RIS) (mean 1.62 kg, SD 7.72; P = 0.43). Categorically defined weight gain (that is, over 7% of baseline weight) was observed in 55.6% of QUE patients, 24.1% of OLZ patients, and 23.7% of RIS patients. Adjusting for demographic and disease-specific confounding factors, QUE patients had greater odds of gaining over 7% of their baseline weight compared with RIS patients (odds ratio [OR] 3.62; 95% CI, 1.02 to 12.83; P = 0.05). No statistical difference was detected between OLZ patients and RIS patients for over 7% of baseline weight (OR 1.54; 95% CI, 0.63 to 3.75; P = 0.12) or over 10% weight gain (OR 1.44; 95% CI, 0.50 to 4.13; P = 0.58). CONCLUSION: Clinicians are reminded to monitor anthropometric and metabolic parameters in all NAP-treated persons. Clinically significant differences in weight gain liability exist among the available NAPs.