Financial Incentives and Nurse Coaching to Enhance Diabetes Outcomes (FINANCE-DM): a trial protocol

Cross-Sector Collaborations Between Health Care Systems and Community Partners That Target Health Equity/Disparities in Diabetes Care

Evidence shows that social determinants of health (SDOH) are key drivers of diabetes outcomes and disparities in diabetes care. Targeting SDOH at the individual, organizational, and policy levels is an essential step in improving health equity for individuals living with diabetes. In addition, there is increasing recognition of the need to build collaboration across the health care system and the communities experiencing inequities to improve health equity. As a result, partnerships between health and nonhealth sectors have emerged as a crucial component for increasing health equity in diabetes care and achieving health equity. The purpose of this article is to discuss cross-sector collaborations between health care systems and nonhealth partners that target health equity in diabetes care.

Cost-effectiveness of financial incentives to improve glycemic control in adults with diabetes: A pilot randomized controlled trial

Purpose

Determine the cost-effectiveness of three financial incentive structures in obtaining a 1% within group drop in HbA1c among adults with diabetes.

Methods

60 African Americans with type 2 diabetes were randomized to one of three financial incentive structures and followed for 3-months. Group 1 (low frequency) received a single incentive for absolute HbA1c reduction, Group 2 (moderate frequency) received a two-part incentive for home testing of glucose and absolute HbA1c reduction and Group 3 (high frequency) received a multiple component incentive for home testing, attendance of weekly telephone education classes and absolute HbA1c reduction. The primary clinical outcome was HbA1c reduction within each arm at 3-months. Cost for each arm was calculated based on the cost of the intervention, cost of health care visits during the 3-month time frame, and cost of workdays missed from illness. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated based on achieving a 1% within group drop in HbA1c and were bootstrapped with 1,000 replications.

Results

The ICER to decrease HbA1c by 1% was $1,100 for all three arms, however, bootstrapped standard errors differed with Group 1 having twice the variation around the ICER coefficient as Groups 2 and 3. ICERs were statistically significant for Groups 2 and 3 (p<0.001) indicating they are cost effective interventions.

Conclusions

Given ICERs of prior diabetes interventions range from $1,000-$4,000, a cost of $1,100 per 1% within group decrease in HbA1c is a promising intervention. Multi-component incentive structures seem to have the least variation in cost-effectiveness.