|
Value of Effective Diabetes Management and Prevention The costs for treating diabetes are rising: direct medical expenditures were estimated at $92 billion in 2002, compared with $44 billion in 1997. In 2002, the breakdown for costs included[1]:
Based on direct costs alone, health care organizations have the financial incentive to improve diabetes quality of care. Economic Impact of Diabetes It comes as no surprise that health care costs for people with diabetes are higher than for those without diabetes. In 2002, per capita medical expenditures totaled $13,243 for people with diabetes versus $2,560 for people without diabetes.[1] The indirect costs of diabetes were estimated to be another $40 billion in 2002, due to lost workdays, restricted-activity days, mortality, and permanent disability[1]:
The combined estimated cost of $132 billion underestimates the total economic impact of diabetes. It accounts neither for care provided by nonpaid caregivers, nor for other areas of health care spending where people with diabetes use services at higher rates than people without diabetes, such as dental care, optometry care, and the use of licensed dietitians. The cost estimate also excludes undiagnosed cases of diabetes. These costs alone do not quantify the impact on quality of life for patients with diabetes and their families.[1] Value of Diabetes Management Strategies discussed in this edition of Quality Profiles™: The Leadership Series that help improve quality and outcomes may also help control costs. These include:
Economic Case for Improving Glycemic Control Macrovascular complications account for 52% of the costs of managing diabetes over the long term.[3] Although intensive management of blood glucose was estimated to cost about $4,500 per patient per year in 2002,[4] it results in cost savings over the long term. In one HMO, total health care costs decreased every year for three years for patients with diabetes whose A1c dropped 1% or more during the first year and who sustained the decrease.[5] The greatest cost savings for the first year was in those whose A1c was between 8% and 10% at the beginning of the study. By the third year, the greatest cost savings was in those whose A1c was less than 8% at baseline.[5] The lower costs resulted from fewer primary health care visits and specialty visits and was unaffected by the presence of complications at baseline.[5] In a clinic serving primarily managed care patients, better glycemic control reduced hospital admissions for acute complications of diabetes, such as infections, hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, and electrolyte disturbances.[6] Diabetic patients whose A1c was between 8% and 10% had about half the number of hospital stays at about half the cost over three years as those whose A1c level was over 10%.[6] Intensive glycemic control has been shown to be cost effective for type 1 diabetes and more recently for type 2 diabetes. In the UKPDS, patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes who received intensive treatment for hyperglycemia (sulfonylureas or insulin) cost more to treat than those who received only diet counseling, but the cost of treatment was largely offset by the reduced cost of complications.[7] Hospitalizations accounted for the largest element of complications costs, and most of the savings in this area were due to shorter stays. Savings were also due to increased time free of complications. Economic Case for Managing Risk Factors for Cardiovascular Disease CVD is an even stronger predictor of future costs in diabetes than A1c levels.[8] In a model based on existing studies of the costs of managing diabetes complications over 30 years, CVD was by far the most costly component (Figure 1).[3] While hyperglycemia is believed to contribute directly to atherosclerosis (and therefore to CVD), hypertension and dyslipidemia are certain risk factors for CVD.[9] Therefore, a focus on managing these conditions in patients with diabetes is likely to result in improved quality of life and lower long-term costs.
Economic Case for Managing Overweight and Obesity Obesity outranks both smoking and alcohol consumption in its harmful effects on health and in driving health care costs.[10] The cost of treating overweight patients with diabetes is about one and a half times that of treating normal-weight patients with diabetes. The cost of treating patients with diabetes who are obese is more than three times as high as for treating patients without diabetes who are of normal weight.[11] One fourth of the growth in health care spending between 1987 and 2001 was for treating people who are obese. Of this, treating diabetes accounted for 38%, treating CVD for 41%, and treating hyperlipidemia for 22%.[11] Weight loss as small as 10% is associated with substantially reduced health care costs, reduced incidence of obesity-related comorbid conditions, and increased lifetime expectancy.[12] In one HMO, members who lost 11% of their weight and kept it off for two years, but then gradually regained it by year seven, had lower health care costs over those seven years. The initial cost in year one for this group was $317 higher per person, which amounted to a total savings over seven years of $11,536 per person. Even though the treated group regained most of the weight,[12] the average annual health care costs for the control group over seven years was 50% greater than those of the treated group. Value of Prevention Because the costs of diabetes are so high and type 2 diabetes is often preventable, treating prediabetes may be one way to help control the rising costs of health care.[13] It is too early to know whether treating prediabetes will result in the same cost savings demonstrated by effective diabetes treatment; however, treating obesity, a risk factor for prediabetes and diabetes, is known to save money and improve quality of life.
Conclusion The disease burden to society and, in particular, to people with diabetes and their families is considerable. Eliminating or reducing the health problems caused by diabetes through better access to preventive care, more widespread diagnosis, more intensive disease management, and the use of new medical technologies could significantly improve the quality of life for people with diabetes, while reducing national spending for health care services and increasing productivity in the U.S. economy.[1] Targeting high-cost diseases, like diabetes, for increased prevention and treatment is one method of controlling overall health care costs.[14] Better treatment requires an investment in the short term, but a study shows that the extra cost is well worth the investment.[14] Health plans that design and implement programs to improve diabetes care generate benefits for their members, physicians, employers, and their organization.[14]
REFERENCES 1. Hogan P, Dall T. Economic costs of diabetes in the U.S. in 2002. Diabetes Care. 2003;26:917-932. 2. American Diabetes Association. Direct and indirect costs of diabetes in the United States. Available at: http://www.diabetes.org/utils/printthispage.jsp?PageID=STATISTICS_233194. Accessed March 16, 2005. 3. Caro JJ, Ward AJ, O’Brien JA. Lifetime costs of complications resulting from type 2 diabetes in the U.S. Diabetes Care. 2002;25:476-481. 4. Bloomgarden ZT. The epidemiology of complications. Diabetes Care. 2002;25:924-932. 5. Wagner EH, Sandhu N, Newton KM, McCulloch DK, Ramsey SD, Grothaus LC. Effect of improved glycemic control on health care costs and utilization. JAMA. 2001;285:182-189. 6. Menzin J, Langley-Hawthorne C, Friedman M, Boulanger L, Cavanaugh R. Potential short-term economic benefits of improved glycemic control. Diabetes Care. 2001;24:51-55. 7. Gray A, Raikou M, McGuire A, et al on behalf of the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Cost effectiveness of an intensive blood glucose control policy in patients with type 2 diabetes: economic analysis alongside randomised controlled trial (UKPDS 41). BMJ. 2000;320:1373-1378. 8. Gilmer TP, O’Connor PJ, Rush WA, et al. Predictors of health care costs in adults with diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2005;28:59-64. 9. American Diabetes Association, American College of Cardiology. Diabetes & Cardiovascular Disease Review. Redefining diabetes control. Issue 1. Available at: http://www.diabetes.org/uedocuments/ DCVDissue1.pdf. Accessed October 20, 2004. 10. Adams K, Corrigan J. Priority Areas for Quality Improvement. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences; 2005 11. Thorpe KE, Florence CS, Howard DH, Joski P. The impact of obesity on rising medical spending. Available at: http://content.healthaffairs,org/cgi/content/abstract/hlthaff.w4.480. Accessed December 19, 2004. 12. American Obesity Association. Why health plans should cover treatments for obesity. Available at: http://www.obesity.org/treatment/health_plans_cover.shtml. Accessed December 1, 2004. Washington Post. Obesity gets part of blame for care costs. Available at: http://pgasb.pgarchiver.wm/washingtonpost/results.html?num=25&st=basic&uid=MAC=50a23aa1f3f5c6104e90e36051420d61&QryTxt=%Obesity+gets+part+of+blame+for+Care+Costs%22&sortby=REVERSE-CHRON&datetype=7. Accessed December 1, 2004. 14. Snyder JW, Malaskovitz J, Griego J, Persson J, Flatt K. Quality improvement and cost reduction realized by a purchaser through diabetes disease management. Dis Manag. 2003;6:233-241. Return to top | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Our sponsors | Privacy policy | Contact us |