Cost-utility of real-time continuous glucose monitoring versus self-monitoring of blood glucose and intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in people with type 1 diabetes receiving multiple daily insulin injections in Denmark
- PMID: 37334522
- DOI: 10.1111/dom.15158
Cost-utility of real-time continuous glucose monitoring versus self-monitoring of blood glucose and intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in people with type 1 diabetes receiving multiple daily insulin injections in Denmark
Abstract
Aims: To determine the cost-effectiveness of the Dexcom G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rt-CGM) system compared with both the self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) and the Abbott FreeStyle Libre 1 and 2 intermittently scanned CGM (is-CGM) devices in people with type 1 diabetes receiving multiple daily insulin injections in Denmark.
Materials and methods: The analysis was performed using the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model, which associates rt-CGM use with glycated haemoglobin reductions of 0.6% and 0.36% based on data from the DIAMOND and ALERTT1 trials, respectively, compared with SMBG and is-CGM use. The analysis was performed from the payer perspective over a 50-year time horizon; future costs and clinical outcomes were discounted at 4% per annum.
Results: The use of rt-CGM was associated with an incremental gain of 1.37 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) versus SMBG. Total mean lifetime costs were Danish Krone (DKK) 894 535 for rt-CGM and DKK 823 474 for SMBG, resulting in an incremental cost-utility ratio of DKK 51 918 per QALY gained versus SMBG. Compared with is-CGM, the use of rt-CGM led to a gain of 0.87 QALYs and higher mean lifetime costs resulting in an incremental cost-utility ratio of DKK 40 879 to DKK 34 367 per QALY gained.
Conclusions: In Denmark, the rt-CGM was projected to be highly cost-effective versus both SMBG and is-CGM, based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of 1× per capita gross domestic product per QALY gained. These findings may help inform future policies to address regional disparities in access to rt-CGM.
Keywords: continuous glucose monitoring (CGM); cost-effectiveness; health economics; hypoglycaemia; type 1 diabetes.
© 2023 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Jørgensen ME, Kristensen JK, Reventlov Husted G, Cerqueira C, Rossing P. The Danish adult diabetes registry. Clin Epidemiol. 2016;8:429-434. doi:10.2147/CLEP.S99518
-
- Carstensen B, Rønn PF, Jørgensen ME. Prevalence, incidence and mortality of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in Denmark 1996-2016. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2020;8(1):e001071. doi:10.1136/bmjdrc-2019-001071
-
- Moalem S, Storey KB, Percy ME, Peros MC, Perl DP. The sweet thing about type 1 diabetes: a cryoprotective evolutionary adaptation. Med Hypotheses. 2005;65(1):8-16. doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2004.12.025
-
- Nielsen HB, Ovesen LL, Mortensen LH, Lau CJ, Joensen LE. Type 1 diabetes, quality of life, occupational status and education level-a comparative population-based study. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2016;121:62-68. doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2016.08.021
-
- Dansk Endokrinologisk Selskab. Continuous glucose monitoring national behandlings vejledninger. Published 2020. https://endocrinology.dk/nbv/diabetes-melitus/kontinuerlig-glukosemaalin... Accessed July 7, 2022.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous
