Trial reportBMJ open2022
Cost-effectiveness of multicomponent interventions in type 2 diabetes mellitus in a cluster randomised controlled trial: the INDICA study.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01657227 (Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Two Multi-component Interventions to Improve the Health Outcomes in People With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Two Multi-component Interventions to Improve the Health Outcomes in People With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyse the cost-effectiveness of multicomponent interventions designed to improve outcomes in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in primary care in the Canary Islands, Spain, within the INDICA randomised clinical trial, from the public health system perspective.
designAn economic evaluation was conducted for the within-trial period (2 years) comparing the four arms of the INDICA study.
settingPrimary care in the Canary Islands, Spain.
participants2334 patients with T2DM without complications were included.
interventionsInterventions for patients (PTI), for primary care professionals (PFI), for both (combined intervention arm for patients and professionals, CBI) and usual care (UC) as a control group. OUTCOMES: The main outcome was the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-years (QALY). Only the intervention and the healthcare costs were included. ANALYSIS: Multilevel models were used to estimate results, and to measure the size and significance of incremental changes. Missed values were treated by means of multiple imputations procedure.
resultsThere were no differences between arms in terms of costs (p=0.093), while some differences were observed in terms of QALYs after 2 years of follow-up (p=0.028). PFI and CBI arms were dominated by the other two arms, PTI and UC. The differences between the PTI and the UC arms were very small in terms of QALYs, but significant in terms of healthcare costs (p=0.045). The total cost of the PTI arm (€2571, 95% CI €2317 to €2826) was lower than the cost in the UC arm (€2750, 95% CI €2506 to €2995), but this difference did not reach statistical significance. Base case estimates of the incremental cost per QALY indicate that the PTI strategy was the cost-effective option.
conclusionsThe INDICA intervention designed for patients with T2DM and families is likely to be cost-effective from the public healthcare perspective. A cost-effectiveness model should explore this in the long term. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01657227.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.