PuSH - Publication Server of Helmholtz Zentrum München: Cost-effectiveness of a collaborative care model among patients with type 2 diabetes and depression in India.

Information

Clues to quality of journals

Open Access Policy of Helmholtz Association 2016

CC Licencences

Publication Metrics

Navigation

Home

Deutsch

EVA: Electronic Publishing

New EVA Application

Research

Advanced Search

Browse by ...

... HMGU-Authors/Consortia

... Organizational Structure

... Journal

... Publication Type

... Research Data

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Publication Year

Publication overview

Statistics

Statistics (last 5 years)

OA Publications

Publish

Submit Publication

Import publication from...

...EVA

Report missing publication

Highlights

Support & Contact

Contact persons

Help

Data protection

Helmholtz Open Science

JANE Journal Estimator

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Emmert-Fees, K. ; Laxy, M. ; Patel, S.A.* ; Singh, K.* ; Poongothai, S.* ; Mohan, V.* ; Chwastiak, L.* ; Narayan, K.M.V.* ; Sagar, R.* ; Sosale, A.R.* ; Anjana, R.M.* ; Sridhar, G.R.* ; Tandon, N.* ; Ali, M.K.*

Cost-effectiveness of a collaborative care model among patients with type 2 diabetes and depression in India.

Diabetes Care 46, 11-19 (2023)

Publ. Version/Full Text

DOI

PMC

	Closed

Open Access Green as soon as Postprint is submitted to ZB.

Abstract
Metrics
Extra information

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of collaborative versus usual care in adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes and depression in India. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed a within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis of a 24-month parallel, open-label, pragmatic randomized clinical trial at four urban clinics in India from multipayer and societal perspectives. The trial randomly assigned 404 patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes (HbA1c ≥8.0%, systolic blood pressure ≥140 mmHg, or LDL cholesterol ≥130 mg/dL) and depressive symptoms (9-item Patient Health Questionnaire score ≥10) to collaborative care (support from nonphysician care coordinators, electronic registers, and specialist-supported case review) for 12 months, followed by 12 months of usual care or 24 months of usual care. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in Indian rupees (INR) and international dollars (Int'l-$) and the probability of cost-effectiveness using quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and depression-free days (DFDs). RESULTS: From a multipayer perspective, collaborative care costed an additional INR309,558 (Int'l-$15,344) per QALY and an additional INR290.2 (Int'l-$14.4) per DFD gained compared with usual care. The probability of cost-effectiveness was 56.4% using a willingness to pay of INR336,000 (Int'l-$16,654) per QALY (approximately three times per-capita gross domestic product). The willingness to pay per DFD to achieve a probability of cost-effectiveness >95% was INR401.6 (Int'l-$19.9). From a societal perspective, cost-effectiveness was marginally lower. In sensitivity analyses, integrating collaborative care in clinical workflows reduced incremental costs by ∼47% (ICER 162,689 per QALY, cost-effectiveness probability 89.4%), but cost-effectiveness decreased when adjusting for baseline values. CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative care for patients with type 2 diabetes and depression in urban India can be cost-effective, especially when integrated in clinical workflows. Long-term cost-effectiveness might be more favorable. Scalability across lower- and middle-income country settings depends on heterogeneous contextual factors.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Web of Science
Times Cited

Altmetric

16.200

0.000