SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW OF UTILITY VALUES ASSOCIATED WITH TYPE 2 DIABETES-RELATED COMPLICATIONS
Author(s)
Beaudet A1, Clegg JP1, Lloyd A21IMS Health, Basel, BS, Switzerland, 2IMS Health, London, United Kingdom
Presentation Documents
OBJECTIVES: Cost-utility analysis of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) interventions requires the estimation of utility values. To increase the robustness of such estimates in line with the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) requirements a systematic literature review of utility values associated with T2DM-related complications was performed. METHODS: The review was performed according to NICE methodology recommendations using Medline, Embase, EconLIT and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database in May 2012. Health utilities selected were based on the NICE reference case, including a preference for EQ-5D data and UK population. Landmark study articles reporting multiple utility values were favoured. RESULTS: A total of 16,578 records were identified. 61 full text articles were included in the qualitative synthesis. T2DM without complication values ranged from 0.690 to 0.970. The proposed utility set primarily consisted of utility values extracted from Clarke 2002 (T2DM without complication: 0.785, myocardial infarction:-0.055, angina:-0.090, heart failure: -0.108, stroke: -0.164, severe vision loss: -0.074, amputation: -0.28) and Bagust 2005 (peripheral vascular disease: -0.061, protenuria: -0.048, neuropathy: -0.084, foot ulcer: -0.170 and overweight: -0.0061 per BMI unit above 25 kg/m2). These values were supplemented by Wasserfallen 2004 (haemodialysis: 0.621, peritoneal dialysis: 0.581); Kiberd and Jidal 1995 (renal transplant: 0.762); Fenwick (mild non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy or macular oedema: 0.760, vision threatening diabetic retinopathy: 0.730) as well as Currie 2006 (major hypoglycaemia: -0.270, minor hypoglycaemia: -0.070). Limitations included the partial lack of studies in a diabetic- or UK-specific population, the variability in reporting media, mean or values adjusted for confounding factors. CONCLUSIONS: This set of values should improve the robustness of T2DM modelling outcomes in line with NICE requirements. Future research could focus on eliciting a coherent set of values for T2DM-related complications in line with the NICE reference case and to define the variance around the utility value point estimates.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2012-11, ISPOR Europe 2012, Berlin, Germany
Value in Health, Vol. 15, No. 7 (November 2012)
Code
PDB54
Topic
Patient-Centered Research
Topic Subcategory
Health State Utilities
Disease
Diabetes/Endocrine/Metabolic Disorders