ArticleNorth Carolina medical journal2023
Cost-effectiveness of Strategies for Postpartum Glucose Intolerance Testing.
Article in North Carolina medical journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAbnormal glucose metabolism after gestational diabetes mellitus can persist postpartum. This study compares the cost and effectiveness of 4 postpartum glucose intolerance screening strategies and their influencing variables.
methodsA decision model compared 4 screening strategies: Fasting capillary glucose test (FCG) 24-72 hours postpartum (inpatient FCG) alone (strategy 1); Inpatient FCG plus 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) (strategy 2) or plus home FCG testing (strategy 3) at 4-12 weeks postpartum; No screening (strategy 4). Clinical probabilities and costs were obtained from institutional data, the literature, retail prices, and reimbursement data. The primary outcome was the per-patient cost and effectiveness of detecting diabetes and prediabetes (i.e., disease) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between strategies. Effectiveness was the proportion of patients with disease detected. Sensitivity analyses examined parameter uncertainty and variance on primary outcome.
resultsThe base case cost and effectiveness per strategy ranged from $1167 to $1330 and 0%-25%, respectively. Strategy 3 was the most effective and expensive strategy compared to strategy 2 - ICER $837, and remained so when less than 36% of patients completed the 2-hour OGTT and when the sensitivity of home FCG testing for detecting diabetes was more than 39%. Strategy 2 was more effective and expensive than strategy 1 - ICER $571. LIMITATIONS: Our model underestimates the cost of a missed case by limiting the horizon to 1 year because of the available data. This is appropriate for our study perspective, but future study is needed to estimate the effect of a longer time horizon on model outcomes.
conclusionsHome FCG testing offers a reasonable alternative to the 2-hour OGTT when adherence to the 2-hour OGTT is low. This model serves as a tool to guide postpartum glucose intolerance screening protocols, minimizing missed opportunities for diagnosis and early intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.