Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to Thread
Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the
Diabetes Forum Survey 2024 »
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Type 1 Diabetes
Blood testing strips, type 1's and the NHS
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tim2000s" data-source="post: 1887668" data-attributes="member: 30007"><p>Hi [USER=94348]@ann34+[/USER], whilst that may be the case, we're facing the same CCG idiocy about not understanding the health economics here. Every time that someone using Glargine ends up in hospital or calling out an ambulance, the cost of the cheaper insulin is overridden multiple times by the cost of simply an ambulance call out.</p><p></p><p><strong>As an example:</strong></p><p></p><p>An annual supply of Glargine for a type 1 using 30u a day (a not unreasonable average) costs £113.31. The tresiba equivalent is £139.8. (I'm using Tresiba because I don't have the data for increased hypos of Lantus compared to Levemir, but do for Tresiba).</p><p></p><p>Tresiba is therefore 23% more expensive.</p><p></p><p>However, as the SWITCH1 trial showed, when you are using Lantus you are one third more likely to have a severe hypo that will need an ambulance call out and may result in hospitalisation than Tresiba.</p><p></p><p>In real terms that's one severe hypo annually. Or in other words, it costs an additional £240 per year to call an ambulance to deal with that hypo.</p><p></p><p>On the Tresiba, it's likely to happen once every 18 months, or in other words, it costs £160 per year.</p><p></p><p>The cost saving of using Lantus over Tresiba at a prescription level is £26.49 per year, so the increased ambulance call out cost (£240 vs £160) means that Lantus really costs at least £53.51 per year more than Tresiba. And that excludes any hospitalisation as a result of the ambulance call out.</p><p></p><p>My point? It's worth delving into the health economics of any decision that a CCG makes and digging through the data, as it's very easy to make it clear to them that their policy not only costs more, but is demonstrably negligent in its outcomes, and CCGs don't like either of those things.</p><p></p><p>Feel free to use this analysis with your healthcare team to make your point.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tim2000s, post: 1887668, member: 30007"] Hi [USER=94348]@ann34+[/USER], whilst that may be the case, we're facing the same CCG idiocy about not understanding the health economics here. Every time that someone using Glargine ends up in hospital or calling out an ambulance, the cost of the cheaper insulin is overridden multiple times by the cost of simply an ambulance call out. [B]As an example:[/B] An annual supply of Glargine for a type 1 using 30u a day (a not unreasonable average) costs £113.31. The tresiba equivalent is £139.8. (I'm using Tresiba because I don't have the data for increased hypos of Lantus compared to Levemir, but do for Tresiba). Tresiba is therefore 23% more expensive. However, as the SWITCH1 trial showed, when you are using Lantus you are one third more likely to have a severe hypo that will need an ambulance call out and may result in hospitalisation than Tresiba. In real terms that's one severe hypo annually. Or in other words, it costs an additional £240 per year to call an ambulance to deal with that hypo. On the Tresiba, it's likely to happen once every 18 months, or in other words, it costs £160 per year. The cost saving of using Lantus over Tresiba at a prescription level is £26.49 per year, so the increased ambulance call out cost (£240 vs £160) means that Lantus really costs at least £53.51 per year more than Tresiba. And that excludes any hospitalisation as a result of the ambulance call out. My point? It's worth delving into the health economics of any decision that a CCG makes and digging through the data, as it's very easy to make it clear to them that their policy not only costs more, but is demonstrably negligent in its outcomes, and CCGs don't like either of those things. Feel free to use this analysis with your healthcare team to make your point. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Type 1 Diabetes
Blood testing strips, type 1's and the NHS
Top
Bottom
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Ad free.
Join the community »
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn More.…