Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27421262›Full record

Trial reportBMC pediatrics2016

Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses of hospital-based home care compared to hospital-based care for children diagnosed with type 1 diabetes; a randomised controlled trial; results after two years' follow-up.

Irén Tiberg, Björn Lindgren, Annelie Carlsson, Inger Hallström

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC pediatrics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00804232 (Childhood Diabetes - Family Based Health Interventions for Child Health), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00804232 naunknown statusnot on this map

Childhood Diabetes - Family Based Health Interventions for Child Health

TypeinterventionalSponsorVardalinstitutet The Swedish Institute for Health SciencesRan2008 to 2015Enrolled210ConditionsDiabetes, Type IArmschildhood diabetes
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. On spillovers in economic evaluations: definition, mapping review and research agenda.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Observational
  12. Observational
  13. Insulin Adherence in Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.Indian journal of endocrinology and metabolism
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Irén TibergDepartment of Health Sciences, Lund University, SE-221 00, Lund, Sweden. iren.tiberg@med.lu.se.ORCID 0000-0001-6057-491X
Björn LindgrenDepartment of Health Sciences, Lund Universit, Lund, Sweden.
Annelie CarlssonDepartment of Paediatrics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Inger HallströmDepartment of Health Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPractices regarding hospitalisation of children at diagnosis of type 1 diabetes vary both within countries and internationally, and high-quality evidence of best practice is scarce. The objective of this study was to close some of the gaps in evidence by comparing two alternative regimens for children diagnosed with type 1 diabetes: hospital-based care and hospital-based home care (HBHC), referring to specialist care in a home-based setting.

methodsA randomised controlled trial, including 60 children aged 3-15 years, took place at a university hospital in Sweden. When the children were medically stable, they were randomised to either the traditional, hospital-based care or to HBHC.

resultsTwo years after diagnosis there were no differences in HbA1c (p = 0.777), in episodes of severe hypoglycaemia (p = 0.167), or in insulin U/kg/24 h (p = 0.269). Over 24 months, there were no statistically significant differences between groups in how parents' reported the impact of paediatric chronic health condition on family (p = 0.138) or in parents' self-reported health-related quality of life (p = 0.067). However, there was a statistically significant difference regarding healthcare satisfaction, favouring HBHC (p = 0.002). In total, healthcare costs (direct costs) were significantly lower in the HBHC group but no statistically significant difference between the two groups in estimated lost production (indirect costs) for the family as a whole. Whereas mothers had a significantly lower value of lost production, when their children were treated within the HBHC regime, fathers had a higher, but not a significantly higher value. The results indicate that HBHC might be a cost-effective strategy in a healthcare sector perspective. When using the wider societal perspective, no difference in cost effectiveness or cost utility was found.

conclusionsOverall, there are only a few, well-designed and controlled studies that compare hospital care to different models of home care. The results of this study provide empirical support for the safety and feasibility of HBHC when a child is diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. Our results further indicate that the model of care may have an impact on families' daily living, not only during the initial period of care but for a longer period of time.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov with identity number NCT00804232 , December 2008.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisCost of IllnessQuality of LifeAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1FemaleFollow-Up StudiesHealth Care CostsHome Care ServicesHospitalizationHumansMaleSwedenTreatment OutcomeCost-effectivenessCost-utilityDirect and indirect costsMetabolic controlQuality of life

Identifiers

PMID27421262
PMCPMC4947351

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.