Cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary collaborative care versus usual care in the management of high-risk patients with diabetes in Singapore: Short-term results from a randomized controlled trial

What is known and objective: Economic evidence of multidisciplinary collaborative care on glycaemic improvement in uncontrolled diabetic patients is limited. Therefore, the primary objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary collaborative care versus usual care and the secondary objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of these two care approaches in relation to varying glycaemic control of patients. Methods: An economic evaluation based on a six-month randomized controlled trial involving high-risk uncontrolled diabetic Asian patients with polypharmacy and multiple comorbidities was conducted from a healthcare institution perspective. The control arm received usual care, while the intervention arm received multidisciplinary care with regular clinical pharmacist follow-up in addition to usual care. The study outcomes included glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) change and total direct outpatient medical costs for diabetes-related care. The cost-effectiveness analyses were conducted for both arms and those stratified according to baseline HbA1c (Group 1:HbA1c 7.1%-7.9%, Group 2:HbA1c ≥8.0%). The incremental cost per glycaemic improvement (HbA1c improvement of 0.1% and above) per patient was examined followed by uncertainty evaluation via probabilistic sensitivity analyses. A range of willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds (US$165.21 to US$5000.00 per glycaemic improvement) was used in analysis. Results and discussion: Overall, the intervention arm had greater improvement in HbA1c (I: mean −0.4% [95% CI −0.6 to −0.2] vs C: mean −0.1% [95% CI −0.2 to 0.1]; P =.014) and lower mean total direct outpatient medical costs per patient in comparison with the control arm (I: US$516.77 ± 222.10 vs C: US$607.78 ± 268.39; P <.001). The intervention arm was the dominant strategy across varying baseline HbA1c with higher probability of Group 2 being cost-effective at higher WTP threshold. What is new and conclusions: The multidisciplinary collaborative care arm was cost-effective in managing Asian patients with varying baseline HbA1c control. The multidisciplinary collaborative care also showed greater probability of being cost-effective among Asian patients with poorly uncontrolled glycaemia.