|
The cost-effectiveness of testing strategies for type 2 diabetes: a modelling study |
Gillett M, Brennan A, Watson P, Khunti K, Davies M, Mostafa S, Gray LJ |
|
|
Record Status This is a bibliographic record of a published health technology assessment from a member of INAHTA. No evaluation of the quality of this assessment has been made for the HTA database. Citation Gillett M, Brennan A, Watson P, Khunti K, Davies M, Mostafa S, Gray LJ. The cost-effectiveness of testing strategies for type 2 diabetes: a modelling study. Health Technology Assessment 2015; 19(33) Authors' objectives To estimate and compare the cost-effectiveness of screening for type 2 diabetes using a HbA1c test versus a FPG test. In addition, to compare the use of a random capillary glucose (RCG) test versus a non-invasive risk score to prioritise individuals who should undertake a HbA1c or FPG test. Authors' conclusions Based on the multiethnic LEADER population, among individuals currently attending NHS Health Checks, it is more cost-effective to screen for diabetes using a HbA1c test than using a FPG test. However, in some localities, the prevalence of diabetes and high risk of diabetes may be higher for FPG relative to HbA1c than in the LEADER cohort. In such cases, whether or not it still holds that HbA1c is likely to be more cost-effective than FPG depends on the relative uptake rates for HbA1c and FPG. Use of the LPDS appears to be more cost-effective than a RCG test for prescreening. Indexing Status Subject indexing assigned by CRD MeSH Cost-Benefit Analysis; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2s; Glucose Tolerance Test; Sensitivity and Specificity Language Published English Country of organisation England English summary An English language summary is available. Address for correspondence NETSCC, Health Technology Assessment, Alpha House, University of Southampton Science Park, Southampton, SO16 7NS UK Tel: +44 23 8059 5586 Email: hta@hta.ac.uk AccessionNumber 32012000432 Date abstract record published 08/08/2012 |
|
|
|