Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Health Services Research
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

The cost-effectiveness of hospital-based telephone coaching for people with type 2 diabetes: a 10 year modelling analysis

Authors: J. E. Varney, D. Liew, T. J. Weiland, W. J. Inder, G. A. Jelinek

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is a burdensome condition for individuals to live with and an increasingly costly condition for health services to treat. Cost-effective treatment strategies are required to delay the onset and slow the progression of diabetes related complications. The Diabetes Telephone Coaching Study (DTCS) demonstrated that telephone coaching is an intervention that may improve the risk factor status and diabetes management practices of people with T2DM. Measuring the cost effectiveness of this intervention is important to inform funding decisions that may facilitate the translation of this research into clinical practice. The purpose of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of telephone coaching, compared to usual diabetes care, in participants with poorly controlled T2DM.

Methods

A cost utility analysis was undertaken using the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Outcomes Model to extrapolate outcomes collected at 6 months in the DTCS over a 10 year time horizon. The intervention’s impact on life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) and costs was estimated. Costs were reported from a health system perspective. A 5 % discount rate was applied to all future costs and effects. One-way sensitivity analyses were conducted to reflect uncertainty surrounding key input parameters.

Results

The intervention dominated the control condition in the base-case analysis, contributing to cost savings of $3327 per participant, along with non-significant improvements in QALE (0.2 QALE) and life expectancy (0.3 years).

Conclusions

The cost of delivering the telephone coaching intervention continuously, for 10 years, was fully recovered through cost savings and a trend towards net health benefits. Findings of cost savings and net health benefits are rare and should prove attractive to decision makers who will determine whether this intervention is implemented into clinical practice.

Trial registration

Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Colagiuri S, et al. Diabcost Australia: assessing the burden of type 2 diabetes in Australia. Canberra: Diabetes Australia; 2003.
2.
Varney JE, et al. The effect of hospital-based telephone coaching on glycaemic control and adherence to management guidelines in type 2 diabetes, a randomised controlled trial. Intern Med J. 2014;44(9):890–7. doi:10.​1111/​imj.​12515.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Perri MG, Foreyt JP. Preventing weight regain after weight loss. In: Bray GA, Bouchard C, editors. Handbook of obesity: clinical applications. New York: Marcel Dekker; 2004.
4.
Hughes SL, et al. Fit and Strong!: bolstering maintenance of physical activity among older adults with lower-extremity osteoarthritis. Am J Health Behav. 2010;34(6):750–63.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Penn L, Moffatt SM, White M. Participants’ perspective on maintaining behaviour change: a qualitative study within the European Diabetes Prevention Study. BMC Public Health. 2008;8:235.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Wing RR, et al. A self-regulation program for maintenance of weight loss. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(15):1563–71.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Perri MG, et al. Effects of four maintenance programs on the long-term management of obesity. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1988;56(4):529–34.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Jelinek M, et al. The COACH program produces sustained improvements in cardiovascular risk factors and adherence to recommended medications-two years follow-up. Heart Lung Circ. 2009;18(6):388–92.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Aubert RE, et al. Nurse case management to improve glycemic control in diabetic patients in a health maintenance organization: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 1998;129(8):605–12.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Eriksson MK, Franks PW, Eliasson M. A 3-year randomized trial of lifestyle intervention for cardiovascular risk reduction in the primary care setting: the Swedish Bjorknas study. PLoS One. 2009;4(4):e5195.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Wing RR. Long-term effects of a lifestyle intervention on weight and cardiovascular risk factors in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus: four-year results of the Look AHEAD trial. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170(17):1566–75.PubMed
12.
The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med.1993;329(14):977–86.
13.
Reinhardt UE, Hussey PS, Anderson GF. U.S. health care spending in an international context. Health Aff (Millwood). 2004;23(3):10–25.CrossRef
14.
Ray JA, et al. Review of the cost of diabetes complications in Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Spain. Curr Med Res Opin. 2005;21(10):1617–29.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Oh JA, et al. A telephone-delivered intervention to improve glycemic control in type 2 diabetic patients. Yonsei Med J. 2003;44(1):1–8.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Kim HS, Oh JA. Adherence to diabetes control recommendations: impact of nurse telephone calls. J Adv Nurs. 2003;44(3):256–61.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Sacco WP, Morrison AD, Malone JI. A brief, regular, proactive telephone “coaching” intervention for diabetes: rationale, description, and preliminary results. J Diabetes Complications. 2004;18(2):113–8.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Thompson DM, Kozak SE, Sheps S. Insulin adjustment by a diabetes nurse educator improves glucose control in insulin-requiring diabetic patients: a randomized trial. CMAJ. 1999;161(8):959–62.PubMedPubMedCentral
19.
Kirkman MS, et al. A telephone-delivered intervention for patients with NIDDM. Effect on coronary risk factors. Diabetes Care. 1994;17(8):840–6.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Young RJ, et al. Pro-active call center treatment support (PACCTS) to improve glucose control in type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(2):278–82.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Clarke PM, et al. A model to estimate the lifetime health outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes: the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Outcomes Model (UKPDS no. 68). Diabetologia. 2004;47(10):1747–59.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Clarke P, Gray A, Holman R. Estimating utility values for health states of type 2 diabetic patients using the EQ-5D (UKPDS 62). Med Decis Making. 2002;22(4):340–9.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Health expenditure Australia 2010–11, Health and welfare expenditure series no. 47. Cat. no. HWE 56. Canberra: AIHW; 2012.
24.
Clarke P, et al. Estimating the cost of complications of diabetes in Australia using administrative health-care data. Value Health. 2008;11(2):199–206.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Goode AD, Reeves MM, Eakin EG. Telephone-delivered interventions for physical activity and dietary behavior change: an updated systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2012;42(1):81–8.CrossRefPubMed
26.
27.
Tanasescu M, et al. Physical activity in relation to cardiovascular disease and total mortality among men with type 2 diabetes. Circulation. 2003;107(19):2435–9.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Hu FB, et al. Physical activity and risk for cardiovascular events in diabetic women. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134(2):96–105.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Church TS, et al. Exercise capacity and body composition as predictors of mortality among men with diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(1):83–8.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Wei M, et al. Low cardiorespiratory fitness and physical inactivity as predictors of mortality in men with type 2 diabetes. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132(8):605–11.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Schechter CB, et al. Cost effectiveness of a telephone intervention to promote dilated fundus examination in adults with diabetes mellitus. Clin Ophthalmol. 2008;2(4):763–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
Wennberg DE, et al. A randomized trial of a telephone care-management strategy. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(13):1245–55.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Handley MA, Shumway M, Schillinger D. Cost-effectiveness of automated telephone self-management support with nurse care management among patients with diabetes. Ann Fam Med. 2008;6(6):512–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
Schechter CB, et al. Intervention costs and cost-effectiveness of a successful telephonic intervention to promote diabetes control. Diabetes Care. 2012;35(11):2156–60.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
35.
Schechter CB, et al. Costs and effects of a telephonic diabetes self-management support intervention using health educators. J Diabetes Complications. 2016;30(2):300–5.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Song M, et al. Use of the UKPDS outcomes model to predict all-cause mortality in U.S. adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus: comparison of predicted versus observed mortality. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2011;91(1):121–6.CrossRefPubMed
37.
McEwan P, Bergenheim K, Currie C. External validation of the ukpds outcomes model equations (UKPDS 68),and the UKPDS risk engine equations (UKPDS 56 and 60) in forecasting cardiovascular outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes. Value Health. 2006;9(3):A37.
38.
Davis WA, Knuiman MW, Davis TM. An Australian cardiovascular risk equation for type 2 diabetes: the Fremantle Diabetes Study. Intern Med J. 2010;40(4):286–92.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AHW). Diabetes prevalence in Australia: detailed estimates for 2007–08, Diabetes series no. 17. Cat. no. CVD 56. Canberra: AIHW; 2011.
40.
Koro CE, et al. Glycemic control from 1988 to 2000 among U.S. adults diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(1):17–20.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Macisaac RJ, Jerums G, Weekes AJ, Thomas MC. Patterns of glycaemic control in Australian primary care (NEFRON 8). Intern Med J. 2009;39(8):512-8.
42.
Kemp TM, et al. Glucose, lipid, and blood pressure control in australian adults with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(6):1490–2.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Bryant W, et al. Diabetes guidelines: easier to preach than to practise? Med J Aust. 2006;185(6):305–9.PubMed
44.
Vos T, ACE–Prevention Team, et al. Assessing Cost-Effectiveness in Prevention (ACE–Prevention): final report. Brisbane: University of Queensland and Melbourne: Deakin University; 2010.
Metadata
Title
The cost-effectiveness of hospital-based telephone coaching for people with type 2 diabetes: a 10 year modelling analysis
Authors
J. E. Varney
D. Liew
T. J. Weiland
W. J. Inder
G. A. Jelinek
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1645-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Health Services Research 1/2016 Go to the issue

Research article

Perceptions of health managers and professionals about mental health and primary care integration in Rio de Janeiro: a mixed methods study

Study protocol

Efficacy and cost effectiveness of telemedicine for improving access to care in the Paris region: study protocols for eight trials

Research article

The feasibility of introducing an adult safeguarding measure for inclusion in the Adult Social Care Outcomes Framework (ASCOF): findings from a pilot study

Research article

Overutilization of ambulatory medical care in the elderly German population? – An empirical study based on national insurance claims data and a review of foreign studies

Research article

Effort-reward imbalance and self-rated health among Gambian healthcare professionals

Research article

Using Participatory Learning & Action research to access and engage with ‘hard to reach’ migrants in primary healthcare research