Advanced search
Publication Cover
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Volume 15, 2015 - Issue 6
Submit an article Journal homepage
320
Views
4
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Reviews

A systematic review of Markov models evaluating multicomponent disease management programs in diabetes

Florian KirschInstitute of Health Economics and Health Care Management and Munich Center of Health Sciences, Munich School of Management, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Ludwigstr. 28 RG, 80539, Munich, GermanyCorrespondence[email protected]
Pages 961-984 | Published online: 04 Nov 2015

References

  • Papers of special note have been highlighted as:
  • • of interest
  • •• of considerable interest
  • Roglic G, Unwin N. Mortality attributable to diabetes: estimates for the year 2010. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2010;87(1):15–19.
  • Danaei G, Finucane MM, Lu Y, et al. National, regional, and global trends in fasting plasma glucose and diabetes prevalence since 1980: systematic analysis of health examination surveys and epidemiological studies with 370 country-years and 2.7 million participants. Lancet. 2011;378(9785):31–40.
  • Guariguata L, Whiting D, Hambleton I, et al. Global estimates of diabetes prevalence for 2013 and projections for 2035. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2014;103(2):137–149.
  • Amos AF, McCarty DJ, Zimmet P. The rising global burden of diabetes and its complications: estimates and projections to the year 2010. Diabet Med. 1997;14(S5):S7–S85.
  • American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes—2010. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(Supplement 1):S11–S61.
  • American Diabetes Association. Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(Supplement 1):S62–S69.
  • Ettaro L, Zhang P, Engelgau MM. Cost-of-illness studies in diabetes mellitus. Pharmacoeconomics. 2004;22(3):149–164.
  • Hauner H. Die Kosten des Diabetes und seiner Komplikationen in Deutschland. Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift. 2006;131(48):240–242.
  • Ng CS, Lee JY, Toh MP, et al. Cost-of-illness studies of diabetes mellitus: a systematic review. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2014;105(2):151–163.

• Comprehensive review of cost-of-illness studies in diabetes.

  • Esteghamati A, Khalilzadeh O, Anvari M, et al. The economic costs of diabetes: a population-based study in Tehran, Iran. Diabetologia. 2009;52(8):1520–1527.
  • Tunceli O, Wade R, Gu T, et al. Cost of diabetes: comparison of disease-attributable and matched cohort cost estimation methods. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010;26(8):1827–1834.
  • Ostermann H, Hoess V, Mueller M. Efficiency of the Austrian disease management program for diabetes mellitus type 2: a historic cohort study based on health insurance provider’s routine data. BMC Public Health. 2012;12:490.
  • Kogut SJ, Johnson S, Higgins T, et al. Evaluation of a program to improve diabetes care through intensified care management activities and diabetes medication copayment reduction. J Manag Care Pharm. 2012;18(4):297–310.
  • Rasekaba TM, Graco M, Risteski C, et al. Impact of a diabetes disease management program on diabetes control and patient quality of life. Popul Health Manag. 2012;15(1):12–19.
  • Hamar GB, Rula EY, Coberley C, et al. Long-term impact of a chronic disease management program on hospital utilization and cost in an Australian population with heart disease or diabetes. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15:174.
  • Tan WS, Ding YY, Xia WC, et al. Effects of a population-based diabetes management program in Singapore. Am J Manag Care. 2014;20(9):e388–398.
  • Lauvergeon S, Burnand B, Peytremann-Bridevaux I. Implementation of a diabetes disease management program in Switzerland: patients’ and healthcare professionals’ point of view. Revue D’epidemiologie Et De Sante Publique. 2013;61(5):475–484.
  • Glasgow RE, Wagner EH, Schaefer J, et al. Development and validation of the patient assessment of chronic illness care (PACIC). Med Care. 2005;43(5):436–444.
  • Bodenheimer T, Wagner EH, Grumbach K. Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness. JAMA. 2002;288(14):1775–1779.
  • Steinhilper G. Lexikon des deutschen Gesundheitssystems. MedR Medizinrecht. 2011;29(2):130–130.
  • Drabik A, Büscher G, Thomas K, et al. Patients with type 2 diabetes benefit from primary care-based disease management: a propensity score matched survival time analysis. Popul Health Manag. 2012;15(4):241–247.
  • Gerlach FM, Beyer M, Szecsenyi J, et al. Evaluation von Disease-Management-Programmen-Aktuelle Defizite, Anforderungen, Methoden. Zeitschrift Für Ärztliche Fortbildung Und Qualitätssicherung. 2003;97(7):495–502.
  • Beyer M, Gensichen J, Szecsenyi J, et al. Wirksamkeit von Disease-Management-Programmen in Deutschland–Probleme der medizinischen Evaluationsforschung anhand eines Studienprotokolls. Zeitschrift Für Ärztliche Fortbildung Und Qualität Im Gesundheitswesen. 2006;100:355–363.
  • Serxner S, Baker K, Gold D. Guidelines for analysis of economic return from health management programs. Am J Health Promot. 2006;20(6):suppl 1–17.
  • Linden A, Adler-Milstein J. Medicare disease management in policy context. Health Care Financ Rev. 2008;29(3):1–11.
  • Nolte E, Conklin A, Adams JL, et al. Evaluating chronic disease management. Santa Monica (CA): RAND Corporation; 2012.
  • Philips Z, Bojke L, Sculpher M, et al. Good practice guidelines for decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment: a review and consolidation of quality assessment. Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24(4):355–371.

•• Based on a review and synthesis of guidelines for model-based economic evaluation Philips et al. developed a comprehensive quality framework for decision analytic models.

  • Goeree R, He J, O’Reilly D, et al. Transferability of health technology assessments and economic evaluations: a systematic review of approaches for assessment and application. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2011;3:89–104.
  • Kirsch F. A systematic review of quality and cost-effectiveness derived from Markov models evaluating smoking cessation interventions in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2015;15(2):301–316.
  • Becker C, Langer A, Leidl R. The quality of three decision-analytic diabetes models: a systematic health economic assessment. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2011;11(6):751–762.

• Qualitative comparison of three diabetic decision analytic models with the Philips quality appraisal.

  • Hatz MH, Leidl R, Yates NA, et al. A systematic review of the quality of economic models comparing thrombosis inhibitors in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;32(4):377–393.
  • Tarride J-E, Hopkins R, Blackhouse G, et al. A review of methods used in long-term cost-effectiveness models of diabetes mellitus treatment. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(4):255–277.

• Assessment of the used methods in twelve Markov models evaluating cost–effectiveness/cost–utility of interventions in type 2 diabetes.

• Extensive review of 78 studies and 41 health technology assessments (HTAs) in type 2 diabetes evaluation cost–effectiveness of interventions in type 2 diabetes.

  • Palmer AJ, Weiss C, Sendi PP, et al. The cost-effectiveness of different management strategies for type I diabetes: a Swiss perspective. Diabetologia. 2000;43(1):13–26.
  • Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.). 2009;339:b2535.
  • Welte R, Feenstra T, Jager H, et al. A decision chart for assessing and improving the transferability of economic evaluation results between countries. Pharmacoeconomics. 2004;22(13):857–876.
  • Caro JJ, Eddy DM, Kan H, et al. Questionnaire to assess relevance and credibility of modeling studies for informing health care decision making: an ISPOR-AMCP-NPC good practice task force report. Value Health. 2014;17(2):174–182.

• Comprehensive quality appraisal for reviewers and modelers to verify the quality of the model.

  • Philips Z, Ginnelly L, Sculpher M, et al. Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8(36):iii–iv, ix–xi, 1–158.
  • Imer TP1, Roze S, Valentine WJ, et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(6):e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097.
  • Gilmer TP, Roze S, Valentine WJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of diabetes case management for low-income populations. Health Serv Res. 2007;42(5):1943–1959.
  • Yu J, Shah BM, Ip EJ, et al. A Markov model of the cost-effectiveness of pharmacist care for diabetes in prevention of cardiovascular diseases: evidence from Kaiser Permanente Northern California. J Manag Care Pharm. 2013;19(2):102–114.
  • 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):340–349.
  • Gage BF, Cardinalli AB, Albers GW, et al. Cost-effectiveness of warfarin and aspirin for prophylaxis of stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. JAMA. 1995;274(23):1839–1845.
  • Lampe FC, Whincup PH, Wannamethee SG, et al. The natural history of prevalent ischaemic heart disease in middle-aged men. Eur Heart J. 2000;21(13):1052–1062.
  • Dasbach E, Fryback D, Thornbury J. Health utility preference differences. Med Decis Mak. 1992;12(4):351.
  • DCCT Research Group. Lifetime benefits and costs of intensive therapy as practiced in the diabetes control and complications trial. JAMA. 1996;276(17):1409–1414.
  • Redekop WK, Stolk EA, Kok E, et al. Diabetic foot ulcers and amputations: estimates of health utility for use in cost-effectiveness analyses of new treatments. Diabetes Metab. 2004;30(6):549–556.
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Cost-effectiveness of intensive glycemic control, intensified hypertension control, and serum cholesterol level reduction for type 2 diabetes. Diabetes in Managed Care Work Group. JAMA. 2002;287(19):2542–2551.
  • Rosen AB, Hamel MB, Weinstein MC, et al. Cost-effectiveness of full Medicare coverage of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors for beneficiaries with diabetes. Ann Intern Med. 2005;143(2):89–99.
  • Kurtin PS, Davies AR, Meyer KB, et al. Patient-based health status measures in outpatient dialysis. Early experiences in developing an outcomes assessment program. Med Care. 1992;30(5 Suppl):Ms136–149.
  • Fryback D, Dasbach E, Klein R, et al. Health assessment by SF-36, quality of well-being index and time trade-offs: predicting one measure from another. Med Decis Mak. 1992;12:348–356.
  • Tsevat J, Goldman L, Soukup JR, et al. Stability of time-tradeoff utilities in survivors of myocardial infarction. Med Decis Mak. 1993;13(2):161–165.
  • Nease RF Jr, Kneeland T, O’Connor GT, et al. Variation in patient utilities for outcomes of the management of chronic stable angina. Implications for clinical practice guidelines. Ischemic heart disease patient outcomes research team. JAMA. 1995;273(15):1185–1190.
  • Mathias SD, Bates MM, Pasta DJ, et al. Use of the health utilities index with stroke patients and their caregivers. Stroke. 1997;28(10):1888–1894.
  • Shin AY, Porter PJ, Wallace MC, et al. Quality of life of stroke in younger individuals. Utility assessment in patients with arteriovenous malformations. Stroke. 1997;28(12):2395–2399.
  • Huang ES, Zhang Q, Brown SE, et al. The cost-effectiveness of improving diabetes care in U.S. federally qualified community health centers. Health Serv Res. 2007;42(6 Pt 1):2174–2193. Discussion 2294–2323.
  • Mason JM, Freemantle N, Gibson JM, et al. Specialist nurse-led clinics to improve control of hypertension and hyperlipidemia in diabetes: economic analysis of the SPLINT trial. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(1):40–46.
  • Gilmer TP, Philis-Tsimikas A, Walker C. Outcomes of Project Dulce: a culturally specific diabetes management program. Ann Pharmacother. 2005;39(5):817–822.
  • Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) Study Investigators. Effects of ramipril on cardiovascular and microvascular outcomes in people with diabetes mellitus: results of the HOPE study and MICRO-HOPE substudy. Lancet. 2000;355(9200):253–259.
  • Hansson L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers SG, et al. Effects of intensive blood-pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in patients with hypertension: principal results of the hypertension optimal treatment (HOT) randomised trial. HOT study group. Lancet. 1998;351(9118):1755–1762.
  • Maru S, Byrnes J, Whitty JA, et al. Systematic review of model-based analyses reporting the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of cardiovascular disease management programs. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2015;14(1):26–33.
  • Parouty MB, Le HH, Krooshof D, et al. Differential time preferences for money and quality of life. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;32(4):411–419.
  • Bleichrodt H, Johannesson M. Standard gamble, time trade-off and rating scale: experimental results on the ranking properties of QALYs. J Health Econ. 1997;16(2):155–175.
  • de Bruin SR, Heijink R, Lemmens LC, et al. Impact of disease management programs on healthcare expenditures for patients with diabetes, depression, heart failure or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review of the literature. Health Policy. 2011;101(2):105–121.
  • Mattke S, Seid M, Ma S. Evidence for the effect of disease management: is $1 billion a year a good investment? Am J Manag Care. 2007;13(12):670–676.
  • Ofman JJ, Badamgarav E, Henning JM, et al. Does disease management improve clinical and economic outcomes in patients with chronic diseases? A systematic review. Am J Med. 2004;117(3):182–192.
  • Norris SL, Nichols PJ, Caspersen CJ, et al. The effectiveness of disease and case management for people with diabetes. A systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2002;22(4 Suppl):15–38.
  • Fuchs S, Henschke C, Blumel M, et al. Disease management programs for type 2 diabetes in Germany: a systematic literature review evaluating effectiveness. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International. 2014;111(26):453–463.
  • Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press; 2005.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Order Reprints Request Corporate Permissions

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

Request Academic Permissions

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.