4.5 Article

Lifetime cost for type 2 diabetes mellitus in Singapore

Journal

JOURNAL OF DIABETES
Volume 10, Issue 4, Pages 296-301

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1753-0407.12604

Keywords

cost of illness; lifetime cost; prevention; type 2 diabetes mellitus

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundThe mean annual direct medical cost of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Singapore has been found to be SGD 2034 using the prevalence-based approach, but the lifetime direct medical cost of T2DM in Singapore remains largely unknown. The aim of the present study was to determine the lifetime direct medical cost attributable to T2DM and provide estimates of potential savings if T2DM can be prevented or delayed. MethodsThe incidence-based approach was used for the cost-of-illness analysis. Yearly medical expenses were obtained from a regional health system database in Singapore to estimate the lifetime medical cost of T2DM patients. Then, the lifetime medical cost of non-T2DM subjects was predicted using a regression model. From the database, gender- and age-specific annual survival rates of T2DM and non-T2DM subjects were obtained and survival-adjusted yearly expenses over the estimated remaining life span were added to obtain lifetime medical costs. The difference between T2DM and non-T2DM subjects was attributed to excess direct medical costs of T2DM. ResultsThe excess lifetime medical expenses for T2DM patients were SGD 132506, 108589, 83326 and 70110 when the age of T2DM diagnosis was 40, 50, 60, and 65years, respectively. ConclusionsEven though T2DM patients have a lower life expectancy, T2DM is associated with substantially higher lifetime medical costs. Delaying the onset of T2DM, especially in the young, may lead to lower lifetime medical expenses. If prevention costs can be kept sufficiently low, effective T2DM prevention efforts would likely lead to a reduction in long-term medical costs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available