Diabetes research and clinical practice · 2018
A systematic review on costs and cost-effectiveness of screening and prevention of type 2 diabetes in women with prior gestational diabetes: Exploring uncharted territory.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Werbrouck Amber, Schmidt Masja, Putman Koen, Benhalima Katrien, Verhaeghe Nick, Annemans Lieven, Simoens Steven
Аннотация
AIMS: Women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are more likely to develop type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) as compared to women with normoglycemic pregnancies. This study aims to explore the literature on cost(-effectiveness) of screening and prevention of T2DM in women with prior GDM.
METHODS: Five databases were systematically searched, inclusion criteria were: (1) women with (prior) GDM; (2) post-partum screening or prevention of T2DM; and (3) health-economic evaluations. No year limits were applied. English, Dutch, French or German publications were included. Quality was assessed using the Consensus Health Economic Criteria checklist.
RESULTS: Two cost-effectiveness analyses and two cost analyses were found. One study evaluated nine screening strategies. Three studies evaluated one prevention strategy each: intensive diet and behavioural modification; annual counseling; and an annual dietary consultation. Methodological quality was poor. Perspectives were unclear, time horizons were too short, and no incremental analyses were performed.
CONCLUSION: An oral glucose tolerance test per three years leads to the lowest cost per case detected, and prevention is potentially cost-effective or cost-saving. More health economic evaluations are needed that compare all relevant alternatives, including 'doing nothing'.
METHODS: Five databases were systematically searched, inclusion criteria were: (1) women with (prior) GDM; (2) post-partum screening or prevention of T2DM; and (3) health-economic evaluations. No year limits were applied. English, Dutch, French or German publications were included. Quality was assessed using the Consensus Health Economic Criteria checklist.
RESULTS: Two cost-effectiveness analyses and two cost analyses were found. One study evaluated nine screening strategies. Three studies evaluated one prevention strategy each: intensive diet and behavioural modification; annual counseling; and an annual dietary consultation. Methodological quality was poor. Perspectives were unclear, time horizons were too short, and no incremental analyses were performed.
CONCLUSION: An oral glucose tolerance test per three years leads to the lowest cost per case detected, and prevention is potentially cost-effective or cost-saving. More health economic evaluations are needed that compare all relevant alternatives, including 'doing nothing'.