análisis de la relación coste-efectividad de la acarbosa en el tratamiento de pacientes con intolerancia a la glucosa cost-effectiveness analysis of acarbose in the treatment of patients with impaired glucose tolerance

Clicks: 344
ID: 202253
2004
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Popular

Ranked #27 of 143 articles by views in cognition and emotion

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 143 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Objetivo: Realizar un análisis de la relación coste-efectividad del tratamiento farmacológico con acarbosa en pacientes con diagnóstico de intolerancia a la glucosa (ITG) y compararlo con la práctica habitual (medidas higiénico-dietéticas y sin tratamiento farmacológico) desde la perspectiva del financiador público. Material y método: A partir de los datos de eficacia provenientes del ensayo clínico STOP-NIDDM respecto a la incidencia de la diabetes mellitus tipo 2 (DM2) y los eventos cardiovasculares (ECV) en los 2 grupos del ensayo (acarbosa y placebo). Se modelizan las consecuencias sanitarias y económicas de los 2 tratamientos en poblaciones de 1.000 individuos, durante un período de 40 meses, mediante un árbol de decisión. Los datos sobre el coste de los recursos se refieren al sistema sanitario español. Resultados: En el caso base del estudio, el tratamiento con acarbosa resulta ligeramente dominante respecto de la práctica habitual, ya que presenta mejores resultados con un coste incluso algo inferior. El análisis de sensibilidad pone de relieve que el tratamiento con acarbosa deja de ser dominante para pasar a presentar, en algunos casos, una relación de coste por transición a DM2 evitada moderadamente positiva; la relación coste-efectividad es especialmente sensible al coste de los tratamientos cardiovasculares, al riesgo de transición a DM2, a la dosis diaria de acarbosa y a la proporción del coste del medicamento a cargo del financiador público. Conclusiones: El tratamiento con acarbosa en pacientes con diagnóstico de intolerancia a la glucosa resulta dominante en comparación con la práctica habitual. El coste por transición a DM2 evitada y por individuo adicional libre de ECV es moderadamente positivo en algunos de los supuestos introducidos en el análisis de sensibilidad. Para evaluar de una forma más completa el posible tratamiento a pacientes con ITG, sería necesario ampliar las alternativas que se han comparado y el horizonte temporal del estudio y utilizar alguna medida de resultados en salud que tenga en cuenta los efectos del tratamiento.
Objective: To perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with acarbose in patients with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) in comparison with conventional treatment (based on medical counseling on diet and health and without drug treatment) from the perspective of the public payer. Material and method: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using data on efficacy, the incidence of diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2) and cardiovascular events from the STOP-NIDDM clinical trial of acarbose treatment vs. placebo. The study used a decision tree analysis to estimate the health and economic impact of the two alternative treatments in a population of 1,000 patients over a period of 40 months. Resource use and cost data refer to the Spanish health care system. Results: In the base case, acarbose treatment was slightly dominant over conventional treatment since it achieved improved outcomes at an even lower cost. Sensitivity analysis revealed that acarbose treatment lost dominance due to a moderately positive cost-effectiveness ratio for avoided progression to DM2 in some scenarios. The cost-effectiveness ratio was particularly sensitive to the cost of cardiovascular treatments, the risk of progression to DM2, the daily doses of acarbose, and the publicly funded share of the cost of this drug. Conclusions: Acarbose treatment in patients diagnosed with IGT appeared to be the dominant alternative compared with conventional treatment. The cost per avoided progression to DM2 and per additional individual free of a cardiovascular event was moderately low in some of the scenarios included in the sensitivity analysis. For a more comprehensive evaluation of the possible treatment of patients with IGT, the alternatives under comparison and the time horizon of the study would need to be increased and more refined health outcome measures, comprising all the treatment's health effects, would need to be introduced.
Reference Key
sabs2004gacetaanlisis Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Ramón Sabés
Journal cognition and emotion
Year 2004
DOI
DOI not found
URL
http://scielo.isciii.es/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0213-91112004000800004
Keywords
cost-effectiveness economic evaluation diabetes prevention cardiovascular eventspublic aspects of medicine

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.