Several interventions can be applied to prevent complications of type 2 diabetes. This article examines the optimal allocation of resources across 4 interventions to treat patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. The interventions are intensive glycemic control, intensified hypertension control, cholesterol reduction, and smoking cessation.
Methods
A linear programming model was designed to select sets of interventions to maximize quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), subject to varied budget and equity constraints.
Results
For no additional cost, approximately 211,000 QALYs can be gained over the lifetimes of all persons newly diagnosed with diabetes by implementing interventions rather than standard care. With increased availability of funds, additional health benefits can be gained but with diminishing marginal returns. The impact of equity constraints is extensive compared to the solution with the same intervention costs and no equity constraint. Under the conditions modeled, intensified hypertension control and smoking cessation interventions were provided most often, and intensive glycemic control and cholesterol reduction interventions were provided less often.
Conclusions
A resource allocation model identifies trade-offs involved when imposing budget and equity constraints on care for individuals with newly diagnosed diabetes.
HarrisMI, FlegalKM, CowieCCPrevalence of diabetes, impaired fasting glucose, and impaired glucose tolerance in US adults. The Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988-1994.Diabetes Care.1998; 21: 518–24.
3.
AlbertiKGMM, DeFronzoRA, ZimmetP, eds. International Textbook of Diabetes Mellitus.New York: John Wiley;1995.
4.
RubinRJ, AltmanWM, MendelsonDN.Health care expenses for people with diabetes mellitus, 1992.J Clin Endocrinol Metab.1994; 78: 809A–809F.
5.
American Diabetes Association.Economic consequences of diabetes mellitus in the US in 1997.Diabetes Care.1998; 21: 296–309.
6.
OhkuboY, KishikawaH, ArakiEIntensive insulin therapy present in the original progression of diabetic microvascular complications in Japanese patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: a randomized prospective 6-year study.Diabetes Res Clin Pract.1995; 28: 103–17.
7.
CDC Diabetes Cost-Effectiveness Group.Cost-effectiveness of intensive glycemic control, intensified hypertension control, and serum cholesterol reduction for type 2 diabetes.JAMA.2002; 287: 2542–51.
8.
ChenMM, BushJW.Maximizing health system output with political and administrative constraints using mathematical programming.Inquiry.1976; 13: 215–27.
9.
GafniA, BirchS.Guidelines for the adoption of new technologies: a prescription for uncontrolled growth in expenditures and how to avoid the problem.Can Med Assoc J.1993; 148: 913–17.
10.
HethcoteHW, Van ArkJW.Epidemiological models for heterogeneous populations: proportionate mixing, parameter estimation, and immunization programs.Math Biosci.1987; 84: 85–118.
11.
KahnJG.The cost-effectiveness of HIV prevention targeting: how much more bang for the buck?Am J Public Health.1996; 86: 1709–12.
12.
KaplanEH.Economic evaluation and HIV prevention community planning: a policy analyst's perspective. In: HoltgraveDR, editor. Handbook of Economic Evaluation of HIV Prevention Programs.New York: Plenum;1998. p. 177–93.
13.
KaplanEH, PollackH.Allocating HIV prevention resources.Socio-Economic Planning Sciences.1998; 32: 257–63.
14.
MayRM, AndersonRM.Spatial heterogeneity and the design of immunization programs.Math Biosci.1984; 72: 83–111.
15.
RichterA, BrandeauML, OwensDK.An analysis of optimal resource allocation for HIV prevention among injection drug users and nonusers.Med Decis Making.1999; 19: 167–79.
16.
StinnettAA, PaltielAD.Mathematical programming for the efficient allocation of health care resources.J Health Econ.1996; 15: 641–53.
17.
van ZonAH, KommerGJ.Patient flows and optimal healthcare resource allocation at the macro-level: a dynamic linear programming approach.Health Care Manag Sci.1999; 2: 87–96.
18.
WangLY, HaddixAC, TeutschSM, CaldwellB.The role of resource allocation models in selecting clinical preventive services.Am J Managed Care.1999; 5(4): 445–54.
19.
GranataAV, HillmanAL.Competing practice guidelines: using cost-effectiveness analysis to make optimal decision.Ann Intern Med.1998; 128(1): 56–63.
20.
WeinsteinMC.From cost-effectiveness ratios to resource allocation: where to draw the line? In: SloanFA, editor. Valuing Health Care: Costs, Benefits, Effectiveness of Pharmaceuticals and Other Medical Technologies.New York: Cambridge University Press;1995. p. 77–97.
21.
ZaricGS, BrandeauML.Optimal investment in a portfolio of HIV prevention programs.Med Decis Making.2001; 21: 391–408.
22.
ZaricGS, BrandeauML.Resource allocation for epidemic control over short time horizons.Math Biosci.2001; 171: 33–58.
23.
WinstonWL.Operations Research: Applications and Algorithms.3rd edition.Belmont, CA: Wadsworth;1994.
24.
TolleyG, KenkelD, FabianR editors. Valuing Health for Policy: An Economic Approach.Chicago: University of Chicago Press;1994.
25.
EastmanRC, JavittJC, HermanWHModel of complications of NIDDM: I. Model construction and assumptions.Diabetes Care.1997; 20(5): 725–34.
26.
EastmanRC, JavittJC, HermanWHModel of complications of NIDDM: II. Analysis of the health benefits and cost-effectiveness of treating NIDDM with the goal of normoglycemia.Diabetes Care.1997; 20: 735–44.
27.
UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group.Intensive blood glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33).Lancet.1998; 352: 837–53.
28.
UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group.Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 38).Br J Med.1998; 317: 703–13.
29.
ShepherdJ, CobbeSM, FordIPrevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia.N Engl J Med.1995; 333: 1301–7.
30.
The West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study Group.Baseline risk factors and their association with outcome in the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study.Am J Cardiol.1997; 79: 756–62.
31.
GoldbergRB, MelliesMJ, SacksFMCardiovascular events and their reduction with pravastatin in diabetic and glucose-intolerant myocardial infarction survivors with average cholesterol levels.Circulation.1998; 98: 2513–14.
32.
CromwellJ, BartoschWJ, FioreMC, HasselbladV, BakerT.Cost-effectiveness of the clinical practice guidelines in the AHCPR guideline for smoking cessation.JAMA.1997; 278: 1759–66.
33.
US Department of Health and Human Services.The Health Benefits of Smoking Cessation—A Report of the Surgeon General.Rockville, MD: Author;1990.
34.
GoldMR, SiegelJE, RussellLB, WeinsteinMC editors. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine.Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press;1996.
35.
RaudinR.Optimization in Operations Research.1st ed.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall;1998. p. 560–2.
36.
NordE.Health status index models for use in resource allocation decisions.Int J Technol Assess Health Care.1996; 12(1): 31–44.
37.
UbelPA, DeKayML, BaronJ, AschDA.Cost-effectiveness analysis in a setting of budget constraints: is it equitable?N Engl J Med.1996; 334(18): 1174–7.
38.
SingerPA.Resource allocation: beyond evidence-based medicine and cost-effectiveness analysis.ACP Journal Club.1997; A16–18.
39.
Carr-HillR.Background material for the workshop on QALYs: assumptions of the QALY procedure.Soc Sci Med.1989; 29: 469–77.
40.
RawlesJ.Castigating QALYs.J Med Ethics.1989; 15: 143–7.
41.
HadornD.The Oregon priority-setting exercise: cost-effectiveness and the rule of rescue, revisited.Med Decis Making.1996; 16(2): 117–19.
42.
NelsonRM, DroughtT.Justice and the moral acceptability of rationing medical care: the Oregon experiment.J Med Philos.1992; 17(1): 97–117.
43.
BlumsteinJF.The Oregon experiment: the role of cost-benefit analysis in the allocation of Medicaid funds.Soc Sci Med.1997; 45(4): 545–54.
44.
TengsTO, MeyerG, SiegelJE, PliskinJS, GrahamJD, WeinsteinMC.Oregon's Medicaid ranking and cost-effectiveness: is there a relationship?Med Decis Making.1996; 16(2): 99–107.
45.
KlevitHD, BatesAC, CastanaresT, KirkEP, Sipes-MetzlerPR, WopatR.Prioritization of health care services: a progress report by the Oregon Health Services Commission.Arch Intern Med.1991; 151(5): 912–16.
46.
KaplanRM.Value judgment in the Oregon Medicaid experiment.Med Care.1994; 32(10): 975–88.
