Pazienti diabetici di tipo 2, non in terapia insulinica e albumina glicata: una valutazione multidimensionale

Chiara Bellia, Marcello Ciaccio, Davide Croce, Emanuela Foglia, Marcello Ciaccio, Lucrezia Ferrario, Mario Plebani, Luca Falqui, Massimiliano Corsi Romanelli, Antonio Ceriello, Massimiliano Corsi Romanelli, Luca Falqui, Fabrizio Schettini, Elena Dozio, Umberto Valentini, Gianluca Perseghin, Angela Girelli, Federico Bertuzzi, Angelo Avogaro, Martina ZaninottoAntonio Nicolucci, Antonio Ceriello, Graziella Bonetti

Risultato della ricerca: Articlepeer review


Insuline-Naaïve type 2 diabetic patients: a multidimensional evaluation on the role of glycated albuminIntroduction: glycated Albumin (GA) is an innovative glycemic marker, that could be used in the clinical practice, asan add-on strategy, to the traditional glycemic monitoring systems, such as glycated haemoglobin (Hb1Ac) and fastingplasma glucose (FPG). The study aims at presenting the results of a multidimensional analysis conducted in Italy,exploring the main clinical, economic, ethical, social and organizational implications, related to the introduction of GA.Methods: an Health Technology Assessment (HTA) approach was implemented. The analysis considered the ItalianNational Healthcare Service (NHS) perspective, and assumed a 12-month time horizon, focusing on type 2 diabetespatients insulin-naïve, assuming oral therapy. The 9 HTA dimensions (derived from the Core Model developed by theEuropean Network of HTA – EUnetHTA) were deployed, considering scientific evidence, health economics tools andqualitative approaches, through the administration of specific questionnaires to 15 diabetes experts.Results: literature reported better GA safety and efficacy profiles, thus being a predictor of the relative risk for diabetescomplications development, and increasing the therapeutic success after 3 months of therapy (97.0% versus71.6%).From an economic point of view, GA introduction resulted in an economic advantage of 1.06% and in a better trade-off between costs sustained and efficacy gained. Considering a 7-item Likert Scale (ranging from -3 to +3), negativeperceptions emerged with regard to equity aspects (0.13 versus0.72) due to GA limited accessibility, whereas it wouldimprove both patients (2.17 versus1.33) and care givers (1.50 versus0.83) quality of life. In the short term, GArequired training courses and equipment update, whereas, in the long term, it could be considered the preferablesolution from an organizational perspective (0.30 versus0.01).Conclusions: the results of this study demonstrated GA strategic relevance, its economic sustainability and feasibility,as well as the potential clinical pathway improvement.
Lingua originaleItalian
pagine (da-a)52-60
Numero di pagine9
RivistaBiochimica Clinica
Stato di pubblicazionePublished - 2019

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • ???subjectarea.asjc.1300.1308???
  • ???subjectarea.asjc.3600.3607???
  • ???subjectarea.asjc.2700.2704???

Cita questo