Dataset Information

The cost implications of continuous glucose monitoring in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes in 3 Canadian provinces: a posthoc cost analysis of the CONCEPTT trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Women with Type 1 Diabetes in Pregnancy Trial (CONCEPTT) found improved health outcomes for mothers and their infants among those randomized to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) compared with SMBG alone. In this study, we evaluated whether CGM or standard SMBG was more or less costly from the perspective of a third-party payer.

Methods

We conducted a posthoc analysis of data from the CONCEPTT trial (Mar. 25, 2013, to Mar. 22, 2016). Health care resource data from 215 pregnant women, randomized to CGM or SMBG, were collected from 31 hospitals in 7 countries. We determined resource costs posthoc based on prices from hospitals in 3 Canadian provinces (Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta). The primary outcome was the difference between groups in the mean total cost of care for mother and infant dyads, paid by each government (i.e., the third-party payer) from randomization to hospital discharge (time horizon). The secondary outcome included CGM and SMBG costs not paid by governments (e.g., glucose monitoring devices and supplies).

Results

The mean total cost of care was lower in the CGM group compared with the SMBG group in each province (Ontario: $13 270.25 v. $18 465.21, difference in mean total cost [DMT] -$5194.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] -$9841 to -$1395; BC: $13 480.57 v. $18 762.17, DMT -$5281.60, 95% CI -$9964 to -$1382; Alberta: $13 294.39 v. $18 674.45, DMT -$5380.06, 95% CI -$10 216 to -$1490). There was no difference in the secondary outcome.

Interpretation

Government health care costs are lower when CGM is paid by the patient, driven by lower costs from reduced use of the neonatal intensive care unit in the CGM group; however, when governments pay for CGM equipment, there is no overall cost difference between CGM and SMBG. Governments should consider paying for CGM, as it results in improved maternal and neonatal outcomes with no added overall cost.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT01788527.

SUBMITTER: Ahmed RJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8191590 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimDiabetes in pregnancy is a major burden with acute and long-term consequences. Its treatment requires adequate diagnosis and monitoring of therapy. Many experimental research on diabetes during pregnancy has been performed in rats. Recently, continuous blood glucose monitoring of non-pregnant diabetic rats revealed an increased circadian variability of blood glucose that made a single blood glucose measurement per day inappropriate to reflect glycemic status. Continuous blood glucose measurement has never been performed in pregnant rats. We wanted to perform continuous blood glucose monitoring in pregnant rats to decipher the influence of pregnancy on blood glucose in diabetic and normoglycemic status.MethodsWe used the transgenic Tet29 diabetes rat model with an inducible knock down of the insulin receptor via RNA interference upon application of doxycycline (DOX) leading to insulin resistant type II diabetes. All Tet29 rats received a HD-XG telemetry implant (Data Sciences International, USA) that measured blood glucose and activity continuously. Rats were divided into four groups and blood glucose was monitored until end of pregnancy or the corresponding period: Tet29 + DOX (diabetic) non-pregnant, Tet29 + DOX (diabetic) pregnant, Tet29 (normoglycemic) non-pregnant, Tet29 (normoglycemic) pregnant.ResultsAll analyzed rats displayed a circadian variation in blood glucose concentration. Circadian variability was much more pronounced in pregnant diabetic rats than in normoglycemic pregnant rats. Pregnancy ameliorated variation in blood glucose in diabetic situation. Pregnancy continuously decreased blood glucose during normoglycemic pregnancy. Diabetic rats were less active than normoglycemic rats. We performed a calculation showing that application of continuous blood glucose measurement reduces animal numbers needed to detect a given effect in experimental setting by decreasing variability and SD.InterpretationContinuous blood glucose monitoring via a telemetry device in pregnant rats provides a more informative picture of the glycemic situation in comparison to single measurements. This could improve diagnosis and therapy of diabetes, decrease animal numbers within experimental settings, and add another physiological parameter (activity) to the analysis that could be helpful in testing therapeutic concepts targeting blood glucose levels and peripheral muscle function. We propose continuous glucose monitoring as a new tool for the evaluation of pregnant diabetic rats.

Project description:BackgroundWomen with type 1 diabetes strive for optimal glycemic control before and during pregnancy to avoid adverse obstetric and perinatal outcomes. For most women, optimal glycemic control is challenging to achieve and maintain. The aim of this study is to determine whether the use of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) will improve glycemic control in women with type 1 diabetes who are pregnant or planning pregnancy.Methods/designA multi-center, open label, randomized, controlled trial of women with type 1 diabetes who are either planning pregnancy with an HbA1c of 7.0 % to ≤10.0 % (53 to ≤ 86 mmol/mol) or are in early pregnancy (<13 weeks 6 days) with an HbA1c of 6.5 % to ≤10.0 % (48 to ≤ 86 mmol/mol). Participants will be randomized to either RT-CGM alongside conventional intermittent home glucose monitoring (HGM), or HGM alone. Eligible women will wear a CGM which does not display the glucose result for 6 days during the run-in phase. To be eligible for randomization, a minimum of 4 HGM measurements per day and a minimum of 96 hours total with 24 hours overnight (11 pm-7 am) of CGM glucose values are required. Those meeting these criteria are randomized to RT- CGM or HGM. A total of 324 women will be recruited (110 planning pregnancy, 214 pregnant). This takes into account 15 and 20 % attrition rates for the planning pregnancy and pregnant cohorts and will detect a clinically relevant 0.5 % difference between groups at 90 % power with 5 % significance. Randomization will stratify for type of insulin treatment (pump or multiple daily injections) and baseline HbA1c. Analyses will be performed according to intention to treat. The primary outcome is the change in glycemic control as measured by HbA1c from baseline to 24 weeks or conception in women planning pregnancy, and from baseline to 34 weeks gestation during pregnancy. Secondary outcomes include maternal hypoglycemia, CGM time in, above and below target (3.5-7.8 mmol/l), glucose variability measures, maternal and neonatal outcomes.DiscussionThis will be the first international multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of RT- CGM before and during pregnancy in women with type 1 diabetes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01788527 Registration Date: December 19, 2012.