Erkrankungsmodellierung bei Diabetes mellitus

Zusammenfassung

Erkrankungsmodellierung spielt zunehmend eine bedeutende Rolle in der Planung und Umsetzung von gesundheitspolitischen und medizinischen Entscheidungen in der Diabetologie. Anwendung, Nutzen, mathematische Grundlagen und Qualitätskriterien für gute Erkrankungsmodellierung bei Diabetes mellitus sind für praktisch tätige Ärzte schwer zugänglich. Im Folgenden wird ein umfassender Überblick über die Methoden der Erkrankungsmodellierung gegeben, um Qualitätskriterien für die Erkrankungsmodellierung und Modellierungsstudien bei Diabetes mellitus offen zu legen. Für die hohe Qualität von Erkrankungsmodellierung sind von besonderer Bedeutung: die korrekte Auswahl der Datenquellen, die nach Kriterien der evidenzbasierten Medizin orientierte Bewertung der medizinischen und ökonomischen Daten, sinnvolle Zeithorizonte, realistische Diskontierung und Inflationierung, repräsentative Zielpopulationen und die Auswahl einer zutreffenden Kosten-Nutzen-Perspektiven. Darüber hinaus sind die Validierung und der sinnvolle Gebrauch der Modelle bedeutsam.

Summary

Disease modelling increasingly plays an important role in planning and implementing medical decision making in diabetes care. For general practicians it is difficult to find access to application, benefit, arithmetic background and quality criteria of modelling. This review provides a comprehensive overview about the current methods in disease modelling in order to access quality criteria for disease modelling and modelling studies in diabetes care. The following criteria are essential for good quality in disease modelling: adequate choice of data sources, assessment of medical and economic data according to criteria of evidence-based medicine, reasonable time horizons, realistic use of discounting and inflation rates, representative target populations and a realistic perspective of the cost-benefit analysis. Furthermore, validation of disease models and the adequate use of those instruments are of importance.

Literatur

• 1 Randomised Trial of Cholesterol Lowering in 4444 Patients With Coronary Heart Disease: the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S).  Lancet. 1994;  344 1383-1389
• 2 Hannover Consensus Group . German Recommendations for Health Care Economic Evaluation Studies. Revised Version of the Hannover Consensus.  Med Klin (Munich). 2000;  95 52-55
• 3 NICE Guideline for Technology Appraisals: Guidance for Manufacturers and Sponsors 1 - 6-2001. National Institute for Clinical Excellence NICE Ref.: N0014
• 4 Gesundheitsbericht für Deutschland,. Statistisches Bundesamt ISBN 3 - 8246 - 0657 - 7 2002
• 5 MERGE Method for Evaluating research Guideline Evidence. State Health Publication No.(CEB) 1996: 96-204
• 6 DATA Professional User’s Manual,. Treeage Inc., Boston 2001
• 7 Bagust A, Hopkinson P K, Maier W, Currie C J. An Economic Model of the Long-Term Health Care Burden of Type II Diabetes.  Diabetologia. 2001;  44 2140-2155
• 8 Bagust A, Hopkinson P K, Maslove L, Currie C J. The Projected Health Care Burden of Type 2 Diabetes in the UK From 2000 to 2060.  Diabet Med. 2002;  19 (Suppl 4) 1-5
• 9 Brown J B, Palmer A J, Bisgaard P, Chan W, Pedula K, Russell A. The Mt. Hood Challenge: Cross-Testing Two Diabetes Simulation Models.  Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2000;  50 S57-S64 (Suppl 3)
• 10 Chalmers T C, Smith H, Blackburn B, Silverman B, Schroeder B, Reitman D, Ambroz A. A Method for Assessing the Quality of a Randomized Control Trial.  Control Clin Trials. 1981;  2 31-49
• 11 Coyle D, Lee K M, O’Brien B J. The Role of Models Within Economic Analysis: Focus on Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.  Pharmacoeconomics. 2002;  20 (Suppl 1) 11-19
• 12 DCCT Research Group . Effect of Intensive Diabetes Treatement on the Development and Progression of Long-Term Complications in Adolescents With Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus.  J Pediatr. 1994;  125 177-188
• 13 Drummond M, Stoddart G, Torrance G W. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford Medical Publications 1987
• 14 Drummond M F, Jefferson T O. Guidelines for Authors and Peer Reviewers of Economic Submissions to the BMJ: The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party.  BMJ. 1996;  313 275-283
• 15 Goetghebeur M, Rindress D. Towards a European Consensus on Conducting and Reporting Health Economic Evaluations. A Report From the ISPOR Inaugural European Conference.  Value in Health. 1999;  2 281-287
• 16 Gold M R, Muennig P. Measure-Dependent Variation in Burden of Disease Estimates: Implications for Policy.  Med Care. 2002;  40 260-266
• 17 Gold M R, Siegel J E, Russell L B, Weinstein M C. Cost-Effectiveness in Health & Medicine. Oxford University Press ISBN: 0 195 108 248 1996
• 18 Gozzoli V, Palmer A J, Brandt A, Weiss C, Piehlmeier W, Landgraf R, Renner R. Increased Clinical and Economic Advantages Using PROSIT (Proteinuria Screening and Intervention) in Type 2 Diabetic Patients.  Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2000;  125 1154-1159
• 19 Guyatt G H, Sackett D L, Sinclair J C, Hayward R, Cook D J, Cook R J. Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature. IX. A Method for Grading Health Care Recommendations.  JAMA. 1995;  274 1800-1804
• 20 Jefferson T, Demicheli V, Vale L. Quality of Systematic Reviews of Economic Evaluations in Health Care.  JAMA. 2002;  287 2809-2812
• 21 Klein R, Klein B E, Moss S E, Cruickshanks K J. The Wisconsin Epidemiologic Study of Diabetic Retinopathy: XVII. The 14-Year Incidence and Progression of Diabetic Retinopathy and Associated Risk Factors in Type 1 Diabetes.  Ophthalmology. 1998;  105 1801-1815
• 22 Kothari V, Stevens R J, Adler A I, Stratton I M, Manley S E, Neil H A, Holman R R. UKPDS 60: Risk of Stroke in Type 2 Diabetes Estimated by the UK Prospective Diabetes Study Risk Engine.  Stroke. 2002;  33 1776-1781
• 23 Palumbo F, Barnes R, Deverka P, Mullany L, Wertheimer A. Report of the ISPOR taskforce on code of ethics. ISPOR http://www.ispor.org/workpaper/code_ethic.htm 2003
• 24 Sanchez L A. Evaluating the Quality of Published Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations.  Hosp Pharm. 1995;  30 146-142
• 25 Schöffski O, von Schulenburg J M. Gesundheitsökonomische Evaluationen. 2. Auflage Springer-Verlag ISBN: 3 - 540 - 42 584 - 5 2002
• 26 Setyawan J, Palel V, Nichol M B. Best Practices: Evaluating Modeling Research at ISPOR Using BMJ and ISPOR Guidelines.  ISPOR Connections. 2003;  9 (5) 6-9
• 27 Siegel J E, Torrance G W, Russell L B, Luce B R, Weinstein M C, Gold M R. Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Studies. Recommendations From the Panel on Cost Effectiveness in Health and Medicine.  Pharmacoeconomics. 1997;  11 159-168
• 28 Stevens R J, Kothari V, Adler A I, Stratton I M. The UKPDS Risk Engine: a Model for the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease in Type II Diabetes (UKPDS 56).  Clin Sci. 2001;  101 671-679
• 29 Stevens R J, Stratton I M, Holman R R. UKPDS58 - Modeling Glucose Exposure as a Risk Factor for Photocoagulation in Type 2 Diabetes.  J Diabetes Complications. 2002;  16 371-376
• 30 Turner R C, Millns H, Neil H A, Stratton I M, Manley S E, Matthews D R, Holman R R. Risk Factors for Coronary Artery Disease in Non-Insulin Dependent Diabetes Mellitus: United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS: 23).  BMJ. 1998;  316 823-828
• 31 Veenstra D L, Ramsey S D, Sullivan S D. A Guideline for the Use of Pharmacoeconomic Models of Diabetes Treatment in the US Managed-Care Environment.  Pharmacoeconomics. 2002;  20 (Suppl 1) 21-30
• 32 Waugh N. Grading of Scientific Evidence - a Discussion Paper from SHPIC.  Health Bull (Edinb). 1999;  57 53-63
• 33 Weinstein M C, O’Brien B, Hornberger J, Jackson J, Johannesson M, McCabe C, Luce B R. Principles of Good Practice for Decision Analytic Modeling in Health-Care Evaluation.  Value Health. 2003;  6 9-17
• 34 Winkelmayer W C, Weinstein M C, Mittleman M A, Glynn R J, Pliskin J S. Health Economic Evaluations: the Special Case of End-Stage Renal Disease Treatment.  Med Decis Making. 2002;  22 417-430
• 35 Wörz M, Perleth M, Schöffski O, Schwartz F W. Innovative Medizinprodukte im deutschen Gesundheitswesen. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft ISBN: 3 - 7890 - 8224 - 4 2002