Cost‐effectiveness analysis of Dexcom ONE + real‐time continuous glucose monitoring versus self‐monitoring of blood glucose in people with type 2 diabetes in Aotearoa New Zealand
Authors' conclusion
This analysis provides insight into the cost-effectiveness of rt-CGM versus SMBG from the perspective of payers in New Zealand, demonstrating reductions in the risks of complications in addition to reductions in their associated costs.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with T2D requiring intensive insulin therapy, New Zealand
- Comparison
- Real-time continuous glucose monitors (rt-CGM) vs self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG)
- Outcome
- Base-case cost-effectiveness
- Follow-up
- Lifetime (50 years)
Methodological detailsIQVIA Core Diabetes Model, healthcare payer perspective, lifetime (50 years) time horizon, annual discount rate 3.5%
- IQVIA Core Diabetes Model
- Healthcare payer perspective
- Lifetime (50 years) time horizon
- Annual discount rate 3.5%
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
QALY gain
0.488 QALYs
rt-CGM
Incremental costs
5633 NZD
rt-CGM
ICER
11 533 NZD per QALY
rt-CGM
- Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained per NZD 1 million invested
- 87
Further findings
Scenario analyses
- CGM potentially cost saving at earlier ages of rt-CGM initiation and in high-risk populations (Māori and Pacific Peoples), with higher QALY gains at lower total direct costs
Complications
- Reductions predicted in risks of ophthalmic, renal, peripheral and cardiovascular complications
Original publication
Cost‐effectiveness analysis of Dexcom ONE + real‐time continuous glucose monitoring versus self‐monitoring of blood glucose in people with type 2 diabetes in Aotearoa New Zealand. Diabetes Obes Metab. Published 9 March 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →