↓ Skip to main content

Comorbidity Type and Health Care Costs in Type 2 Diabetes: A Retrospective Claims Database Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Diabetes Therapy, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
Comorbidity Type and Health Care Costs in Type 2 Diabetes: A Retrospective Claims Database Analysis
Published in
Diabetes Therapy, August 2018
DOI 10.1007/s13300-018-0477-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pei-Jung Lin, Elle Pope, Fang Liz Zhou

Abstract

Previous studies suggest that the type and combination of comorbidities may impact diabetes care, but their cost implications are less clear. This study characterized how diabetes patients' health care utilization and costs may vary according to comorbidity type classified on the basis of the Piette and Kerr framework. We conducted a retrospective observational study of privately insured US adults newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes (n = 138,466) using the 2014-2016 Optum Clinformatics® Data Mart. Diabetes patients were classified into five mutually exclusive comorbidity groups: concordant only, discordant only, both concordant and discordant, any dominant, and none. We estimated average health care costs of each comorbidity group by using generalized linear models, adjusting for patient demographics, region, insurance type, and prior-year costs. Most type 2 diabetes patients had discordant conditions only (27%), dominant conditions (25%), or both concordant and discordant conditions (24%); 7% had concordant conditions only. In adjusted analyses, comorbidities were significantly associated with higher health care costs (p < 0.0001) and the magnitude of the association varied with comorbidity type. Diabetes patients with dominant comorbidities incurred substantially higher costs ($38,168) compared with individuals with both concordant and discordant conditions ($20,401), discordant conditions only ($9173), concordant conditions only ($9000), and no comorbidities ($3365). More than half of the total costs in our sample (53%) were attributable to 25% of diabetes patients who had dominant comorbidities. Diabetes patients with both concordant and discordant conditions and with clinically dominant conditions incurred substantially higher health costs than other diabetes patients. Our findings suggest that diabetes management programs must explicitly address concordant, discordant, and dominant conditions because patients may have distinctly different health care needs and utilization patterns depending on their comorbidity profiles. The Piette and Kerr framework may serve as a screening tool to identify high-need, high-cost diabetes patients and suggest targets for tailored interventions. Sanofi.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Other 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 13 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 18%
Unspecified 2 4%
Computer Science 2 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 17 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 August 2018.
All research outputs
#15,542,971
of 23,099,576 outputs
Outputs from Diabetes Therapy
#583
of 1,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,131
of 331,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetes Therapy
#15
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,099,576 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,040 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,118 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.