Published in

BioMed Central, Systematic Reviews, 1(9), 2020

DOI: 10.1186/s13643-020-01373-y

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Cost-effectiveness of health technologies in adults with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

Journal article published in 2020 by Anthony Pease, Ella Zomer, Danny Liew ORCID, Clement Lo, Arul Earnest, Sophia Zoungas ORCID
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Abstract Background With the rapid development of technologies for type 1 diabetes, economic evaluations are integral in guiding cost-effective clinical and policy decisions. We therefore aimed to review and synthesise the current economic literature for available diabetes management technologies and outline key determinants of cost-effectiveness. Methods A systematic search was conducted in April 2019 that focused on modelling or trial based economic evaluations. Searched databases included Medline, Medline in-process and other non-indexed citations, EMBASE, PubMed, All Evidenced Based Medicine Reviews, EconLit, Cost-effectiveness analysis Registry, Research Papers in Economics, Web of Science, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and PROSPERO from inception. We assessed quality of included studies with the Questionnaire to Assess Relevance and Credibility of Modeling Studies for Informing Health Care Decision Making an ISPOR-AMCP-NPC good practice task force report. Screening of abstracts and full-texts, appraisal, and extraction were performed by two independent researches. Results We identified 16,772 publications, of which 35 were analysed and included 11 health technologies. Despite a lack of consensus, most studies reported that insulin pumps (56%) or interstitial glucose sensors (62%) were cost-effective, although incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged widely ($14,266–$2,997,832 USD). Cost-effectiveness for combined insulin pumps and glucose sensors was less clear. Determinants of cost-effectiveness included treatment effects on glycosylated haemoglobin and hypoglycaemia, costing of technologies and complications, and measures of utility. Conclusions Insulin pumps or glucose sensors appeared cost-effective, particularly in populations with higher HbA1c levels and rates of hypoglycaemia. However, cost-effectiveness for combined insulin pumps and glucose sensors was less clear. Registration The study was registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42017077221.