Dataset Information

Cost effectiveness of group follow-up after structured education for type 1 diabetes: a cluster randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This study examines the cost effectiveness of group follow-up after participation in the Dose Adjustment for Normal Eating (DAFNE) structured education programme for type 1 diabetes.

Methods

Economic evaluation conducted alongside a cluster randomised controlled trial involving 437 adults with type 1 diabetes in Ireland. Group follow-up involved two group education 'booster' sessions post-DAFNE. Individual follow-up involved two standard one-to-one hospital clinic visits. Incremental costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and cost effectiveness were estimated at 18 months. Uncertainty was explored using sensitivity analysis and by estimating cost effectiveness acceptability curves.

Results

Group follow-up was associated with a mean reduction in QALYs gained of 0.04 per patient (P value, 0.052; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.01, intra-class correlation (ICC), 0.033) and a mean reduction in total healthcare costs of €772 (P value, 0.020; 95% CI, -1,415 to -128: ICC, 0.016) per patient. At alternative threshold values of €5,000, €15,000, €25,000, €35,000, and €45,000, the probability of group follow-up being cost effective was estimated to be 1.000, 0.762, 0.204, 0.078, and 0.033 respectively.

Conclusions

The results do not support implementation of group follow-up as the sole means of follow-up post-DAFNE. Given the reported cost savings, future studies should explore the cost effectiveness of alternative models of group care for diabetes.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN79759174 (assigned: 9 February 2007).

SUBMITTER: Gillespie P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4070096 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the cost-effectiveness of a structured education pulmonary rehabilitation programme (SEPRP) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) relative to usual practice in primary care. The programme consisted of group-based sessions delivered jointly by practice nurses and physiotherapists over 8 weeks.DesignCost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis alongside a cluster randomised controlled trial.Setting32 general practices in Ireland.Participants350 adults with COPD, 69% of whom were moderately affected.InterventionsIntervention arm (n=178) received a 2 h group-based SEPRP session per week over 8 weeks delivered jointly by a practice nurse and physiotherapist at the practice surgery or nearby venue. The control arm (n=172) received the usual practice in primary care.Main outcome measuresIncremental costs, Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) scores, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained estimated using the generic EQ5D instrument, and expected cost-effectiveness at 22 weeks trial follow-up.ResultsThe intervention was associated with an increase of €944 (95% CIs 489 to 1400) in mean healthcare cost and €261 (95% CIs 226 to 296) in mean patient cost. The intervention was associated with a mean improvement of 1.11 (95% CIs 0.35 to 1.87) in CRQ Total score and 0.002 (95% CIs -0.006 to 0.011) in QALYs gained. These translated into incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of €850 per unit increase in CRQ Total score and €472 000 per additional QALY gained. The probability of the intervention being cost-effective at respective threshold values of €5000, €15 000, €25 000, €35 000 and €45 000 was 0.980, 0.992, 0.994, 0.994 and 0.994 in the CRQ Total score analysis compared to 0.000, 0.001, 0.001, 0.003 and 0.007 in the QALYs gained analysis.ConclusionsWhile analysis suggests that SEPRP was cost-effective if society is willing to pay at least €850 per one-point increase in disease-specific CRQ, no evidence exists when effectiveness was measured in QALYS gained.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN52 403 063.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of insulin pumps and Dose Adjustment for Normal Eating (pumps+DAFNE) compared with multiple daily insulin injections and DAFNE (MDI+DAFNE) for adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) in the UK. METHODS:We undertook a cost-utility analysis using the Sheffield Type 1 Diabetes Policy Model and data from the Relative Effectiveness of Pumps over Structured Education (REPOSE) trial to estimate the lifetime incidence of diabetic complications, intervention-based resource use and associated effects on costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). All economic analyses took a National Health Service and personal social services perspective and discounted costs and QALYs at 3.5% per annum. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed on the base case. Further uncertainties in the cost of pumps and the evidence used to inform the model were explored using scenario analyses. SETTING:Eight diabetes centres in England and Scotland. PARTICIPANTS:Adults with T1DM who were eligible to receive a structured education course and did not have a strong clinical indication or a preference for a pump. INTERVENTION:Pumps+DAFNE. COMPARATOR:MDI+DAFNE. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Incremental costs, incremental QALYs gained and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS:Compared with MDI+DAFNE, pumps+DAFNE was associated with an incremental discounted lifetime cost of +£18?853 (95% CI £6175 to £31 645) and a gain in discounted lifetime QALYs of +0.13 (95% CI -0.70 to +0.96). The base case mean ICER was £142?195 per QALY gained. The probability of pump+DAFNE being cost-effective using a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20?000 per QALY gained was 14.0%. All scenario and subgroup analyses examined indicated that the ICER was unlikely to fall below £30?000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS:Our analysis of the REPOSE data suggests that routine use of pumps in adults without an immediate clinical need for a pump, as identified by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, would not be cost-effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:ISRCTN61215213.

Project description:IntroductionPeople with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) require insulin therapy to sustain life, and need optimal glycaemic control to prevent diabetic ketoacidosis and serious long-term complications. Insulin is generally administered using multiple daily injections but can also be delivered using an infusion pump (continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion), a more costly option with benefits for some patients. The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommend the use of pumps for patients with the greatest need, citing insufficient evidence to approve extension to a wider population. Far fewer UK adults use pumps than in comparable countries. Previous trials of pump therapy have been small and of short duration and failed to control for training in insulin adjustment. This paper describes the protocol for a large randomised controlled trial comparing pump therapy with multiple daily injections, where both groups are provided with high-quality structured education.Methods and analysisA multicentre, parallel group, cluster randomised controlled trial among 280 adults with T1DM. All participants attended the week-long dose adjustment for normal eating (DAFNE) structured education course, and receive either multiple daily injections or pump therapy for 2?years. The trial incorporates a detailed mixed-methods psychosocial evaluation and cost-effectiveness analysis. The primary outcome will be the change in glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) at 24?months in those participants whose baseline HbA1c is at or above 7.5% (58?mmol/mol). The key secondary outcome will be the proportion of participants reaching the NICE target of an HbA1c of 7.5% (58?mmol/mol) or less at 24?months.Ethics and disseminationThe protocol was approved by the Research Ethics Committee North West, Liverpool East and received Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) clinical trials authorisation. Each participating centre gave National Health Service R&D approval. We shall disseminate study findings to study participants and through peer reviewed publications and conference presentations, including lay user groups.Trial registration numberISRCTN 61215213.

Project description:IntroductionHeavy goods vehicle (HGV) drivers exhibit higher than nationally representative rates of obesity, and obesity-related comorbidities, in comparison to other occupational groups. Their working environments are not conducive to a healthy lifestyle, yet there has been limited attention to health promotion efforts. We have developed a Structured Health Intervention For Truckers (the SHIFT programme), a multicomponent, theory-driven, health-behaviour intervention targeting physical activity, diet and sitting in HGV drivers. This paper describes the protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial designed to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the SHIFT programme.Methods and analysisHGV drivers will be recruited from a logistics company in the UK. Following baseline measurements, depots (clusters) will be randomised to either the SHIFT intervention or usual-care control arm (12 clusters in each, average cluster size 14 drivers). The 6-month SHIFT intervention includes a group-based interactive 6-hour education session, worksite champion support and equipment provision (including a Fitbit and resistance bands/balls to facilitate a 'cab workout'). Objectively measured total daily physical activity (steps/day) will be the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes include: objectively measured light-intensity physical activity and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, sitting time, sleep quality, markers of adiposity, blood pressure and capillary blood markers (glycated haemoglobin, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol). Self-report questionnaires will examine fruit and vegetable intake, psychosocial and work outcomes and mental health. Quality of life and resources used (eg, general practitioner visits) will also be assessed. Measures will be collected at baseline, 6 and 12 months and analysed according to a modified intention-to-treat principle. A full process evaluation and cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the Loughborough University Ethics Approvals Sub-Committee (reference: R17-P063). Study findings will be disseminated through publications in research and professional journals, through conference presentations and to relevant regional and national stakeholders via online media and at dissemination events.Trial registration numberISRCTN10483894.

Project description:BackgroundKilled whole-cell oral cholera vaccines (OCVs) are widely used for prevention of cholera in developing countries. However, few studies have evaluated the protection conferred by internationally recommended OCVs for durations beyond 2 years of follow-up.MethodsIn this study, we followed up the participants of a cluster-randomised controlled trial for 2 years after the end of the original trial. Originally, we had randomised 90 geographical clusters in Dhaka slums in Bangladesh in equal numbers (1:1:1) to a two-dose regimen of OCV alone (targeted to people aged 1 year or older), a two-dose regimen of OCV plus a water-sanitation-hygiene (WASH) intervention, or no intervention. There was no masking of group assignment. The WASH intervention conferred little additional protection to OCV and was discontinued at 2 years of follow-up. Surveillance for severe cholera was continued for 4 years. Because of the short duration and effect of the WASH intervention, we combined the two OCV intervention groups. The primary outcomes were OCV overall protection (protection of all members of the intervention clusters) and total protection (protection of individuals who got vaccinated in the intervention clusters) against severe cholera, which we assessed by multivariable survival models appropriate for cluster-randomised trials. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01339845.FindingsThe study was done between April 17, 2011, and Nov 1, 2015. 268 896 participants were present at the time of the first dose, with 188 206 in the intervention group and 80 690 in the control group. OCV coverage of the two groups receiving OCV was 66% (123 659 of 187 214 participants). During 4 years of follow-up, 441 first episodes of severe cholera were detected (243 episodes in the vaccinated groups and as 198 episodes in the unvaccinated group). Overall OCV protection was 36% (95% CI 19 to 49%) and total OCV protection was 46% (95% CI 32 to 58). Cumulative total vaccine protection was notably lower for people vaccinated before the age of 5 years (24%; -30 to 56) than for people vaccinated at age 5 years or older (49%; 35 to 60), although the differences in protection for the two age groups were not significant (p=0·3308). Total vaccine protection dropped notably (p=0·0115) after 3 years in children vaccinated at 1-4 years of age.InterpretationThese findings provide further evidence of long-term effectiveness of killed whole-cell OCV, and therefore further support for the use of killed whole-cell OCVs to control endemic cholera, but indicate that protection is shorter-lived in children vaccinated before the age of 5 years than in people vaccinated at the age of 5 years or older.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation.TranslationFor the Bengali translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Diabetes is an important contributor to the burden of disease in South Africa and prevalence rates as high as 33% have been recorded in Cape Town. Previous studies show that quality of care and health outcomes are poor. The development of an effective education programme should impact on self-care, lifestyle change and adherence to medication; and lead to better control of diabetes, fewer complications and better quality of life. METHODS: TRIAL DESIGN: Pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trialParticipants: Type 2 diabetic patients attending 45 public sector community health centres in Cape TownInterventions: The intervention group will receive 4 sessions of group diabetes education delivered by a health promotion officer in a guiding style. The control group will receive usual care which consists of ad hoc advice during consultations and occasional educational talks in the waiting room. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of the group diabetes education programmeOutcomes: PRIMARY OUTCOMES: diabetes self-care activities, 5% weight loss, 1% reduction in HbA1c. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: self-efficacy, locus of control, mean blood pressure, mean weight loss, mean waist circumference, mean HbA1c, mean total cholesterol, quality of lifeRandomisation: Computer generated random numbersBlinding: Patients, health promoters and research assistants could not be blinded to the health centre's allocationNumbers randomized: Seventeen health centres (34 in total) will be randomly assigned to either control or intervention groups. A sample size of 1360 patients in 34 clusters of 40 patients will give a power of 80% to detect the primary outcomes with 5% precision. Altogether 720 patients were recruited in the intervention arm and 850 in the control arm giving a total of 1570. DISCUSSION: The study will inform policy makers and managers of the district health system, particularly in low to middle income countries, if this programme can be implemented more widely. TRIAL REGISTER: Pan African Clinical Trial Registry PACTR201205000380384.

Project description:General Practitioners (GPs) play an important role in the follow-up of patients after deliberate self-poisoning (DSP). The aim was to examine whether structured follow-up by GPs increased the content of, adherence to, and satisfaction with treatment after discharge from emergency departments.This was a multicentre, randomised trial with blinded assignment. Five emergency departments and general practices in the catchment area participated. 202 patients discharged from emergency departments after DSP were assigned. The intervention was structured follow-up by the GP over a 6-month period with a minimum of five consultations, accompanied by written guidelines for the GPs with suggestions for motivating patients to follow treatment, assessing personal problems and suicidal ideation, and availability in the case of suicidal crisis. Outcome measures were data retrieved from the Register for the control and payment of reimbursements to health service providers (KUHR) and by questionnaires mailed to patients and GPs. After 3 and 6 months, the frequency and content of GP contact, and adherence to GP consultations and treatment in general were registered. Satisfaction with general treatment received and with the GP was measured by the EUROPEP scale.Patients in the intervention group received significantly more consultations than the control group (mean 6.7 vs. 4.5 (p = 0.004)). The intervention group was significantly more satisfied with the time their GP took to listen to their personal problems (93.1% vs. 59.4% (p = 0.002)) and with the fact that the GP included them in medical decisions (87.5% vs. 54. 8% (p = 0.009)). The intervention group was significantly more satisfied with the treatment in general than the control group (79% vs. 51% (p = 0.026)).Guidelines and structured, enhanced follow-up by the GP after the discharge of the DSP patient increased the number of consultations and satisfaction with aftercare in general practice. Consistently with previous research, there is still a need for interventional studies.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01342809. Registered 18 April 2011.