The improved survival rate and cost-effectiveness of a 7-day continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion set
Abstract
Aims The purpose of this article is to compare the insulin cost-savings of the Medtronic Extended Infusion Set (or EIS, a.k.a. Extended Wear Infusion Set) designed and labeled for up to 7-day use with rapid-acting insulins to the current standard of care, 2- to 3-day infusion sets. Methods There are three major improvements (reducing insulin waste, plastic waste, and adverse events) with the extended duration of infusion set wear. This analysis focuses on cost savings from reduced insulin wastage during set changes. Studies published on insulin infusion set survival and EIS clinical trial data (NCT04113694) were used to estimate device lifetime performance using a Markov chain Monte Carlo model, including the assessment of adverse effects and device failure. Total costs associated with infusion set change or failure were systematically found in published literature or estimated based on physical usage, and the direct impact on insulin costs was calculated. Results Based on the model and clinical data, EIS users can expect to change their infusion sets about 75 fewer times than standard set users each year. The costs related to unrecoverable insulin during an infusion set and reservoir change in the US were estimated to range from $19.79 to $22.48, resulting in approximately $1324 to $1677 in annual cost-savings for the typical user from minimizing insulin wastage. Limitations The study only assessed devices used within a monitored setting, that is, clinical trials. In additio…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A recent medical economics Markov Chain Monte Carlo model analysis of standard IIS clinical data versus this study EIS trial data showed a greater average lifetime of 151.6 versus 66.0 h, resulting in 75 fewer set changes per year, for the EIS.
“A recent medical economics Markov Chain Monte Carlo model analysis of standard IIS clinical data8,18 versus this study EIS trial data showed a greater average lifetime of 151.6 versus 66.0 h, resulting in 75 fewer set changes per year, for the EIS.23”
From Evaluation of Extended Infusion Set Performance in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: Infusion Set Survival Rate and Glycemic Outcomes from a Pivotal Trial (2022) · cites this paper as [23]
Cites
Randomized Trial of Infusion Set Function: Steel Versus Teflon
Patel, P. J., Benasi, K., Ferrari, G., Evans, M. G., Shanmugham, S., Wilson, D. M., & Buckingham, B. A. (2014) · Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1089/dia.2013.0119 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Early Detection of Infusion Set Failure During Insulin Pump Therapy in Type 1 Diabetes
Cescon, M., DeSalvo, D. J., Ly, T. T., Maahs, D. M., Messer, L. H., Buckingham, B. A., Doyle, F. J., & Dassau, E. (2016) · Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology · doi:10.1177/1932296816663962 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Whaley, C. M., Bollyky, J. B., Lu, W., Painter, S., Schneider, J., Zhao, Z., He, X., Johnson, J., & Meadows, E. S. (2019) · Journal of Medical Economics · doi:10.1080/13696998.2019.1609483 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Brazg, R., Garg, S. K., Bhargava, A., Thrasher, J. R., Latif, K., Bode, B. W., Bailey, T. S., Horowitz, B. S., Cavale, A., Kudva, Y. C., et al. (2022) · Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1089/dia.2021.0540 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Kwa, T., Zhang, G., Shepard, K., Wherry, K., & Chattaraj, S.
- Affiliations
- Medtronic Diabetes, Northridge, CA, USA
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Economics
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2021-01-01
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 837-845
- ISSN
- 1369-6998
- 1941-837X
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 3
- Language
- en
- Funders
- Medtronic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review