Economic Value of Improved Accuracy for Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Devices for Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes in England. (September 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: McQueen, Robert Brett; Breton, Marc D.; Craig, Joyce; Holmes, Hayden; Whittington, Melanie D.; Ott, Markus A.; Campbell, Jonathan D.
• Is Part Of: Journal of diabetes science and technology. Volume 12:Number 5(2018:Sep.)
• Page Start: 992
• Page End: 1001
• Publication Date: 2018-09
• Subjects: cost-effectiveness -- self-monitoring of blood glucose -- accuracy -- glycemic control -- simulation; Diabetes -- Periodicals; Medical technology -- Periodicals; Diabetes Mellitus -- Periodicals; 616.462005
• DOI: 10.1177/1932296818769098
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1932-2968

Abstract

Objective: The objective was to model clinical and economic outcomes of self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) devices with varying error ranges and strip prices for type 1 and insulin-treated type 2 diabetes patients in England. Methods: We programmed a simulation model that included separate risk and complication estimates by type of diabetes and evidence from in silico modeling validated by the Food and Drug Administration. Changes in SMBG error were associated with changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and separately, changes in hypoglycemia. Markov cohort simulation estimated clinical and economic outcomes. A SMBG device with 8.4% error and strip price of £0.30 (exceeding accuracy requirements by International Organization for Standardization [ISO] 15197:2013/EN ISO 15197:2015) was compared to a device with 15% error (accuracy meeting ISO 15197:2013/EN ISO 15197:2015) and price of £0.20. Outcomes were lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results: With SMBG errors associated with changes in HbA1c only, the ICER was £3064 per QALY in type 1 diabetes and £264 668 per QALY in insulin-treated type 2 diabetes for an SMBG device with 8.4% versus 15% error. With SMBG errors associated with hypoglycemic events only, the device exceeding accuracy requirements was cost-saving and more effective in insulin-treated type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Conclusions: Investment in devices with higher strip prices but improved accuracy (less error) appears to be an efficient strategy for insulin-treated diabetes patients at high risk of severe hypoglycemia.