Cost-effectiveness of intensive multifactorial treatment compared with routine care for individuals with screen-detected Type 2 diabetes: analysis of the ADDITION-UK cluster-randomized controlled trial

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaperJournal article


    L Tao, United KingdomE C F Wilson, United KingdomN J Wareham, United Kingdom
  • A Sandbaek
  • G E H M Rutten, Netherlands
  • T Lauritzen
  • K Khunti, United KingdomM J Davies, United KingdomK Borch-Johnsen, Sektion for Almen Medicin, Institut for Folkesundhed, Holbæk Sygehus, DenmarkS J Griffin, United Kingdom
  • Rebecca Simmons
To examine the short- and long-term cost-effectiveness of intensive multifactorial treatment compared with routine care among people with screen-detected Type 2 diabetes.

Cost–utility analysis in ADDITION-UK, a cluster-randomized controlled trial of early intensive treatment in people with screen-detected diabetes in 69 UK general practices. Unit treatment costs and utility decrement data were taken from published literature. Accumulated costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated using ADDITION-UK data from 1 to 5 years (short-term analysis, n = 1024); trial data were extrapolated to 30 years using the UKPDS outcomes model (version 1.3) (long-term analysis; n = 999). All costs were transformed to the UK 2009/10 price level.

Adjusted incremental costs to the NHS were £285, £935, £1190 and £1745 over a 1-, 5-, 10- and 30-year time horizon, respectively (discounted at 3.5%). Adjusted incremental QALYs were 0.0000, – 0.0040, 0.0140 and 0.0465 over the same time horizons. Point estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) suggested that the intervention was not cost-effective although the ratio improved over time: the ICER over 10 years was £82 250, falling to £37 500 over 30 years. The ICER fell below £30 000 only when the intervention cost was below £631 per patient: we estimated the cost at £981.

Given conventional thresholds of cost-effectiveness, the intensive treatment delivered in ADDITION was not cost-effective compared with routine care for individuals with screen-detected diabetes in the UK. The intervention may be cost-effective if it can be delivered at reduced cost.
Original languageEnglish
JournalDiabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association
Issue number7
Pages (from-to)907-19
Number of pages13
StatePublished - Jul 2015

See relations at Aarhus University Citationformats


ID: 97773835