摘要
目的 评价称重膳食疗法与非称重膳食疗法治疗2型糖尿病的成本-效果。方法 选取2020年1-12月住院的621例2型糖尿病患者作为研究对象,采用倾向性评分匹配均衡组间差异,基于电子病案系统收集成本、疗效、疾病情况等信息,并通过计算增量成本-效果比(incremental cost–effectiveness ratio,ICER)进行成本-效果分析。结果经倾向性评分匹配后,称重膳食组重复住院次数、住院天数、降糖药物费用和总成本均低于非称重膳食组,其中称重膳食组平均总成本(19 985.63元)比非称重组(21 538.60元)少1552.97元,且降糖效果高0.79 mmol/L,ICER等于-1965.78。结论 与非称重膳食疗法相比,应用称重膳食治疗2型糖尿病具有成本效果优势,建议在临床进一步推广应用。[营养学报,2022,44(5):505-509]
Objective To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of weighed diet therapy versus non-weighed diet therapy for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus(T2DM). Methods We selected 621 T2DM inpatients from January to December 2020 Information on cost, efficacy, and disease status basing on an electronic case system was collected, and cost-effectiveness analysis by calculating incremental cost-effectiveness ratios(ICER) was conducted. Results Hospital readmissions, length of hospital stay, cost of glucose-lowering medication, and total cost were lower in the weighed diet therapy group than in the non-weighed diet therapy group after propensity score matching. The weighed diet therapy group not only saved 1552.97 RMB, but also reduced blood glucose value by 0.79 mmol/L, with an ICER equal to-1965.78.Conclusion The application of weighed diet therapy for the treatment of T2DM has cost-effectiveness advantages over non-weighed diet therapy and should be recommended for further clinical application. [ACTA NUTRIMENTA SINICA, 2022,44(5):505-509]
作者
齐玉梅
牛琛
王丽静
贾国瑜
肖慧娟
张明
郑平
刘文苑
QI Yu-mei;NIU Chen;WANG Li-jing;JIA Guo-yu;XIAO Hui-juan;ZHANG Ming;ZHENG Ping;LIU Wen-yuan(‘Tianjin Third Central Hospital/Tianjin Key Laboratory of Extracorporeal Life Support for Critical Diseases/Artificial CellEngineering Technology Research Center/Tianjin Institute of Hepatobiliary Disease,Tianjin 300170,China;Tianjin Clinical Nutrition Quality Control Center,Tianjin 300170,China)
出处
《营养学报》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2022年第5期505-509,共5页
Acta Nutrimenta Sinica
基金
天津市卫生健康委员会科技项目(No.ZC20115)。
关键词
2型糖尿病
医疗膳食
成本效果分析
经济负担
倾向性评分匹配分析
type 2 diabetes mellitus
medical diet
cost-effectiveness
economic burden
propensity score matching analysis