These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Evaluation of the long-term cost-effectiveness of insulin detemir compared with neutral protamine hagedorn insulin in patients with type 1 diabetes using a basal-bolus regimen in Sweden.
    Author: Valentine WJ, Aagren M, Haglund M, Ericsson A, Gschwend MH.
    Journal: Scand J Public Health; 2011 Feb; 39(1):79-87. PubMed ID: 20688795.
    Abstract:
    AIMS: To evaluate the long-term clinical and economic outcomes associated with insulin detemir and neutral protamine hagedorn (NPH) insulin in combination with mealtime insulin aspart in patients with type 1 diabetes in Sweden, based on data from a two-year, multi-national, open-label, randomized, controlled trial. METHODS: Insulin detemir was associated with significant improvements in glycaemic control after 24 months (HbA1c 7.36% versus 7.58%, mean difference -0.22%, p = 0.022) and major hypoglycaemic events (69% risk reduction, p = 0.001) versus NPH. Patients treated with detemir gained less weight (1.7 versus 2.7 kg, P = 0.024). Based on these findings, a published and validated computer model (IMS CORE Diabetes Model) was used to estimate life-expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy and both direct medical costs and indirect costs. RESULTS: Basal-bolus therapy with insulin detemir was projected to improve life expectancy by 0.14 years (15.02 ± 0.19 versus 14.88 ± 0.18 years) and quality-adjusted life expectancy by 0.53 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) versus NPH (8.35 ± 0.11 versus 7.82 ± 0.10 QALYs). Improvements in QALYs were driven by avoided or delayed diabetes-related complications and fewer hypoglycaemic events. Direct medical costs over patient lifetimes were SEK 26,144 higher in the insulin detemir arm (SEK 995,025 ± 19,580 versus 968,881 ± 19,769), leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of SEK 49,757 per QALY gained. Capturing indirect costs led to insulin detemir being cost saving over patient lifetimes, by SEK 80,113, compared to NPH (SEK 2,959,909 ± 64,727 versus 3,040,022 ± 62,317). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with NPH, insulin detemir is likely to be cost-effective from a healthcare payer perspective and dominant from a societal perspective in patients with type 1 diabetes in Sweden.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]