Cost-Benefit Analysis of Internet Therapeutic Intervention on Patients With Diabetes

被引:7
|
作者
Deng, Lan [1 ]
White, Adam S. [2 ,3 ]
Pawlowska, Monika [3 ]
Pottinger, Betty [4 ]
Aydin, Jessica [4 ]
Chow, Nelson [5 ]
Tildesley, Hugh D. [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] McGill Univ, Dept Biochem, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[2] Univ British Columbia, St Pauls Hosp, Dept Endocrinol & Metab, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada
[3] Univ British Columbia, Dept Med, Vancouver, BC, Canada
[4] Endocrine Res Soc, Vancouver, BC, Canada
[5] Univ British Columbia, Dept Biochem, Vancouver, BC, Canada
关键词
Diabetes Mellitus; Internet; Economics; Online Systems; Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring; Telemedicine; Cost-Benefit Analysis;
D O I
10.5812/ijem.22803
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: With the emergence of IBGMS for allowing for patients to communicate their self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) readings with their health care providers, their impact on the management of diabetes is becoming well-supported with regards to clinical benefits. Their impact on healthcare costs, however, has yet to be investigated. This study aims to determine the cost-benefits of such interventions in comparison to routine care. Objectives: To analyze the cost-benefit of an Internet Blood Glucose Monitoring Service (IBGMS) in comparison to routine diabetes care. Patients and Methods: 200 patients were surveyed to assess the cost associated with doctor appointments in the past 12 months. Annual number of visits to medical services for diabetes and costs of transportation, parking, and time taken off work for visits were surveyed. Self-reported frequency of SMBG and most recent A1C were also surveyed. We compared 100 patients who used the IBGMS with 100 patients who only used routine care. Results: There is a trend of lowered total cost in the intervention group compared to the control group. The control group spent $210.89 per year on visits to physicians; the intervention group spent $131.26 (P = 0.128). Patients in control group visited their endocrinologist 1.76 times per year, those in intervention group visited their endocrinologist 1.36 times per year, significantly less frequently than the control group (P = 0.014). Number of visits to other medical services is similar between the groups. Average A1C in intervention group is 7.57%, in control group is 7.69% (P = 0.309). Conclusions: We have demonstrated that IBGMS, while not reaching statistical significance, may be associated with slightly reduced A1C and cost due to visiting physicians.
引用
收藏
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] On the Cognitive Argument for Cost-Benefit Analysis
    Andreas Christiansen
    Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 2018, 21 : 217 - 230
  • [22] Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Hiring Process
    Bayraktar, Cahit Ali
    Ozbek, Mukaddes
    2011 ASIA-PACIFIC POWER AND ENERGY ENGINEERING CONFERENCE (APPEEC), 2011,
  • [23] The Comprehensiveness Dilemma of Cost-Benefit Analysis
    Sager, Tore
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT AND INFRASTRUCTURE RESEARCH, 2013, 13 (03): : 169 - 183
  • [24] Cost-benefit analysis of electrocyclone and cyclone
    Chen, CJ
    Wang, LFS
    RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND RECYCLING, 2001, 31 (04) : 285 - 292
  • [25] Economics of Sex: Cost-Benefit Analysis
    Petr Houdek
    Petr Koblovský
    Society, 2017, 54 : 18 - 22
  • [26] Rethinking the Role of Cost-benefit Analysis
    Farber, Daniel A.
    UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LAW REVIEW, 2009, 76 (03) : 1355 - 1405
  • [27] Cost-benefit analysis for banking internationalization
    Yuan, Xuemei
    Ma, Li
    Proceedings of the 2005 Conference of System Dynamics and Management Science, Vol 1: SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF ASIA PACIFIC, 2005, : 485 - 489
  • [28] Methodological Challenges in Cost-Benefit Analysis
    Voros, Tunde
    PUBLIC FINANCE QUARTERLY-HUNGARY, 2018, 63 (03): : 402 - 423
  • [29] Cost-benefit analysis and privatized corrections
    Pratt, Travis C.
    CRIMINOLOGY & PUBLIC POLICY, 2019, 18 (02) : 447 - 456
  • [30] Of What Use Is Cost-Benefit Analysis?
    Klie, Axel
    GAIA-ECOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES FOR SCIENCE AND SOCIETY, 2012, 21 (01): : 10 - 12