Cargando…

A systematic review: Cost‐effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring compared to self‐monitoring of blood glucose in type 1 diabetes

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is rapidly becoming a vital tool in the management of type 1 diabetes. Its use has been shown to improve glycaemic management and reduce the risk of hypoglycaemic events. The cost of CGM remains a barrier to its widespread application. We aimed to identify and syn...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jiao, Yuxin, Lin, Rose, Hua, Xinyang, Churilov, Leonid, Gaca, Michele J., James, Steven, Clarke, Philip M., O'Neal, David, Ekinci, Elif I.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9659662/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36112608
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/edm2.369
_version_ 1784830250433118208
author Jiao, Yuxin
Lin, Rose
Hua, Xinyang
Churilov, Leonid
Gaca, Michele J.
James, Steven
Clarke, Philip M.
O'Neal, David
Ekinci, Elif I.
author_facet Jiao, Yuxin
Lin, Rose
Hua, Xinyang
Churilov, Leonid
Gaca, Michele J.
James, Steven
Clarke, Philip M.
O'Neal, David
Ekinci, Elif I.
author_sort Jiao, Yuxin
collection PubMed
description Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is rapidly becoming a vital tool in the management of type 1 diabetes. Its use has been shown to improve glycaemic management and reduce the risk of hypoglycaemic events. The cost of CGM remains a barrier to its widespread application. We aimed to identify and synthesize evidence about the cost‐effectiveness of utilizing CGM in patients with type 1 diabetes. Studies were identified from MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library from January 2010 to February 2022. Those that assessed the cost‐effectiveness of CGM compared to self‐monitored blood glucose (SMBG) in patients with type 1 diabetes and reported lifetime incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER) were included. Studies on critically ill or pregnant patients were excluded. Nineteen studies were identified. Most studies compared continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and SMBG to a sensor‐augmented pump (SAP). The estimated ICER range was [$18,734–$99,941] and the quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) gain range was [0.76–2.99]. Use in patients with suboptimal management or greater hypoglycaemic risk revealed more homogenous results and lower ICERs. Limited studies assessed CGM in the context of multiple daily injections (MDI) (n = 4), MDI and SMBG versus SAP (n = 2) and three studies included hybrid closed‐loop systems. Most studies (n = 17) concluded that CGM is a cost‐effective tool. This systematic review suggests that CGM appears to be a cost‐effective tool for individuals with type 1 diabetes. Cost‐effectiveness is driven by reducing short‐ and long‐term complications. Use in patients with suboptimal management or at risk of severe hypoglycaemia is most cost‐effective.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9659662
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96596622022-11-14 A systematic review: Cost‐effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring compared to self‐monitoring of blood glucose in type 1 diabetes Jiao, Yuxin Lin, Rose Hua, Xinyang Churilov, Leonid Gaca, Michele J. James, Steven Clarke, Philip M. O'Neal, David Ekinci, Elif I. Endocrinol Diabetes Metab Review Article Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is rapidly becoming a vital tool in the management of type 1 diabetes. Its use has been shown to improve glycaemic management and reduce the risk of hypoglycaemic events. The cost of CGM remains a barrier to its widespread application. We aimed to identify and synthesize evidence about the cost‐effectiveness of utilizing CGM in patients with type 1 diabetes. Studies were identified from MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library from January 2010 to February 2022. Those that assessed the cost‐effectiveness of CGM compared to self‐monitored blood glucose (SMBG) in patients with type 1 diabetes and reported lifetime incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER) were included. Studies on critically ill or pregnant patients were excluded. Nineteen studies were identified. Most studies compared continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and SMBG to a sensor‐augmented pump (SAP). The estimated ICER range was [$18,734–$99,941] and the quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) gain range was [0.76–2.99]. Use in patients with suboptimal management or greater hypoglycaemic risk revealed more homogenous results and lower ICERs. Limited studies assessed CGM in the context of multiple daily injections (MDI) (n = 4), MDI and SMBG versus SAP (n = 2) and three studies included hybrid closed‐loop systems. Most studies (n = 17) concluded that CGM is a cost‐effective tool. This systematic review suggests that CGM appears to be a cost‐effective tool for individuals with type 1 diabetes. Cost‐effectiveness is driven by reducing short‐ and long‐term complications. Use in patients with suboptimal management or at risk of severe hypoglycaemia is most cost‐effective. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-09-16 /pmc/articles/PMC9659662/ /pubmed/36112608 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/edm2.369 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Endocrinology, Diabetes & Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Article
Jiao, Yuxin
Lin, Rose
Hua, Xinyang
Churilov, Leonid
Gaca, Michele J.
James, Steven
Clarke, Philip M.
O'Neal, David
Ekinci, Elif I.
A systematic review: Cost‐effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring compared to self‐monitoring of blood glucose in type 1 diabetes
title A systematic review: Cost‐effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring compared to self‐monitoring of blood glucose in type 1 diabetes
title_full A systematic review: Cost‐effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring compared to self‐monitoring of blood glucose in type 1 diabetes
title_fullStr A systematic review: Cost‐effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring compared to self‐monitoring of blood glucose in type 1 diabetes
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review: Cost‐effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring compared to self‐monitoring of blood glucose in type 1 diabetes
title_short A systematic review: Cost‐effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring compared to self‐monitoring of blood glucose in type 1 diabetes
title_sort systematic review: cost‐effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring compared to self‐monitoring of blood glucose in type 1 diabetes
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9659662/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36112608
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/edm2.369
work_keys_str_mv AT jiaoyuxin asystematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT linrose asystematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT huaxinyang asystematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT churilovleonid asystematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT gacamichelej asystematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT jamessteven asystematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT clarkephilipm asystematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT onealdavid asystematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT ekincielifi asystematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT jiaoyuxin systematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT linrose systematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT huaxinyang systematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT churilovleonid systematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT gacamichelej systematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT jamessteven systematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT clarkephilipm systematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT onealdavid systematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes
AT ekincielifi systematicreviewcosteffectivenessofcontinuousglucosemonitoringcomparedtoselfmonitoringofbloodglucoseintype1diabetes