Cost Implications to Health Care Payers of Improving Glucose Management among Adults with Type 2 Diabetes

Published in: HSR, Health Services Research, 2011

Posted on on January 01, 2011

by Teryl K. Nuckols, Elizabeth A. McGlynn, John L. Adams, Julie Lai, Myong-Hyun Go, Joan Keesey, Julia E. Aledort

Read More

Access further information on this document at HSR

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost implications to payers of improving glucose management among adults with type 2 diabetes. DATA SOURCE/STUDY SETTING: Medical-record data from the Community Quality Index (CQI) study (1996-2002), pharmaceutical claims from four Massachusetts health plans (2004-2006), Medicare Fee Schedule (2009), published literature. STUDY DESIGN: Probability tree depicting glucose management over 1 year. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: We determined how frequently CQI study subjects received recommended care processes and attained Health Care Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) treatment goals, estimated utilization of visits and medications associated with recommended care, assigned costs based on utilization, and then modeled how hospitalization rates, costs, and goal attainment would change if all recommended care was provided. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Relative to current care, improved glucose management would cost U.S. $327 (U.S. $192-711 in sensitivity analyses) more per person with diabetes annually, largely due to antihyperglycemic medications. Cost-effectiveness to payers, defined as incremental annual cost per patient newly attaining any one of three HEDIS goals, would be U.S.$1,128; including glycemic crises reduces this to U.S.$555-1,021. CONCLUSIONS: The cost of improving glucose management appears modest relative to diabetes-related health care expenditures. The incremental cost per patient newly attaining HEDIS goals enables payers to consider costs as well as outcomes that are linked to future profitability.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.