A model to estimate cost-savings in diabetic foot ulcer prevention efforts

Name: A model to estimate cost-savings in diabetic foot ulcer prevention efforts
Author: Barshes, N. R., Saedi, S., Wrobel, J., Kougias, P., Kundakcıoğlu, Ömer Erhun, Armstrong, D. G.

İsim	A model to estimate cost-savings in diabetic foot ulcer prevention efforts
Yazar	Barshes, N. R., Saedi, S., Wrobel, J., Kougias, P., Kundakcıoğlu, Ömer Erhun, Armstrong, D. G.
Basım Tarihi:	2017
Basım Yeri	- Elsevier
Konu	Diabetic foot ulcer, Prevention, Cost-utility study, Cost-effectiveness, Economic evaluation, Amputation
Tür	Süreli Yayın
Dil	İngilizce
Dijital	Evet
Yazma	Hayır
Kütüphane:	Özyeğin Üniversitesi
Demirbaş Numarası	1873-460X
Kayıt Numarası	9462bf41-d3f0-4d6c-a266-12109bb1cbec
Lokasyon	Industrial Engineering
Tarih	2017
Örnek Metin	Background: Sustained efforts at preventing diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) and subsequent leg amputations are sporadic in most health care systems despite the high costs associated with such complications. We sought to estimate effectiveness targets at which cost-savings (i.e. improved health outcomes at decreased total costs) might occur. Methods: A Markov model with probabilistic sensitivity analyses was used to simulate the five-year survival, incidence of foot complications, and total health care costs in a hypothetical population of 100,000 people with diabetes. Clinical event and cost estimates were obtained from previously-published trials and studies. A population without previous DFU but with 17% neuropathy and 11% peripheral artery disease (PAD) prevalence was assumed. Primary prevention (PP) was defined as reducing initial DFU incidence. Results: PP was more than 90% likely to provide cost-savings when annual prevention costs are less than $50/person and/or annual DFU incidence is reduced by at least 25%. Efforts directed at patients with diabetes who were at moderate or high risk for DFUs were very likely to provide cost-savings if DFU incidence was decreased by at least 10% and/or the cost was less than $150 per person per year. Conclusions: Low-cost DFU primary prevention efforts producing even small decreases in DFU incidence may provide the best opportunity for cost-savings, especially if focused on patients with neuropathy and/or PAD. Mobile phone-based reminders, self-identification of risk factors (ex. Ipswich touch test), and written brochures may be among such low-cost interventions that should be investigated for cost-savings potential.

Kaynağa git Özyeğin Üniversitesi

Aramaya Dön

Özyeğin Üniversitesi

Kaynağa git

A model to estimate cost-savings in diabetic foot ulcer prevention efforts

Yazar Barshes, N. R., Saedi, S., Wrobel, J., Kougias, P., Kundakcıoğlu, Ömer Erhun, Armstrong, D. G.

Basım Tarihi 2017

Basım Yeri - Elsevier

Konu Diabetic foot ulcer, Prevention, Cost-utility study, Cost-effectiveness, Economic evaluation, Amputation

Tür Süreli Yayın

Dil İngilizce

Dijital Evet

Yazma Hayır

Kütüphane Özyeğin Üniversitesi

Demirbaş Numarası 1873-460X

Kayıt Numarası 9462bf41-d3f0-4d6c-a266-12109bb1cbec

Lokasyon Industrial Engineering

Tarih 2017

Örnek Metin Background: Sustained efforts at preventing diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) and subsequent leg amputations are sporadic in most health care systems despite the high costs associated with such complications. We sought to estimate effectiveness targets at which cost-savings (i.e. improved health outcomes at decreased total costs) might occur. Methods: A Markov model with probabilistic sensitivity analyses was used to simulate the five-year survival, incidence of foot complications, and total health care costs in a hypothetical population of 100,000 people with diabetes. Clinical event and cost estimates were obtained from previously-published trials and studies. A population without previous DFU but with 17% neuropathy and 11% peripheral artery disease (PAD) prevalence was assumed. Primary prevention (PP) was defined as reducing initial DFU incidence. Results: PP was more than 90% likely to provide cost-savings when annual prevention costs are less than $50/person and/or annual DFU incidence is reduced by at least 25%. Efforts directed at patients with diabetes who were at moderate or high risk for DFUs were very likely to provide cost-savings if DFU incidence was decreased by at least 10% and/or the cost was less than $150 per person per year. Conclusions: Low-cost DFU primary prevention efforts producing even small decreases in DFU incidence may provide the best opportunity for cost-savings, especially if focused on patients with neuropathy and/or PAD. Mobile phone-based reminders, self-identification of risk factors (ex. Ipswich touch test), and written brochures may be among such low-cost interventions that should be investigated for cost-savings potential.