Quality of Life of Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus Using Insulin Analog Glargine Compared with NPH Insulin: A Systematic Review and Policy Implications

Paulo H. R. F. Almeida (), Thales B. C. Silva (), Francisco de Assis Acurcio (), Augusto A. Guerra Júnior (), Vania E. Araújo (), Leonardo M. Diniz (), Brian Godman (), Alessandra M. Almeida () and Juliana Alvares ()
Additional contact information
Paulo H. R. F. Almeida: Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG)
Thales B. C. Silva: Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG)
Francisco de Assis Acurcio: Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG)
Augusto A. Guerra Júnior: Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG)
Vania E. Araújo: Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG)
Leonardo M. Diniz: Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG)
Brian Godman: University of Strathclyde
Alessandra M. Almeida: Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG)
Juliana Alvares: Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG)

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2018, vol. 11, issue 4, No 2, 377-389

Abstract: Abstract Introduction Insulin analog glargine (GLA) has been available as one of the therapeutic options for patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus to enhance glycemic control. Studies have shown that a decrease in the frequency of hypoglycemic episodes improves the quality of life (QoL) of diabetic patients. However, there are appreciable acquisition cost differences between different insulins. Consequently, there is a need to assess their impact on QoL to provide future guidance to health authorities. Method A systematic review of multiple databases including Medline, LILACS, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases with several combinations of agreed terms involving randomized controlled trials and cohorts, as well as manual searches and gray literature, was undertaken. The primary outcome measure was a change in QoL. The quality of the studies and the risk of bias was also assessed. Results Eight studies were eventually included in the systematic review out of 634 publications. Eight different QoL instruments were used (two generic, two mixed, and four specific), in which the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) was the most used. The systematic review did not consistently show any significant difference overall in QoL scores, whether as part of subsets or combined into a single score, with the use of GLA versus neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin. Only in patient satisfaction measured by DTSQ was a better result consistently seen with GLA versus NPH insulin, but not using the Well-being Inquiry for Diabetics (WED) scale. However, none of the cohort studies scored a maximum on the Newcastle–Ottawa scale for quality, and they generally were of moderate quality with bias in the studies. Conclusion There was no consistent difference in QoL or patient-reported outcomes when the findings from the eight studies were collated. In view of this, we believe the current price differential between GLA and NPH insulin in Brazil cannot be justified by these findings.

Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-017-0291-3 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:patien:v:11:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s40271-017-0291-3

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40271

DOI: 10.1007/s40271-017-0291-3

Access Statistics for this article

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research is currently edited by Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research from Springer, International Academy of Health Preference Research
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().