A health economic evaluation of the 3DFD service (Version 1)
Research type
Research Study
Full title
A Health Economic Evaluation of the Three Dimensions of care for Diabetes (3DFD) Service
IRAS ID
118423
Contact name
Khalida Ismail
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
King's College London
Research summary
3 Dimensions For People with Diabetes (3DFD) is a service designed to help people with persistent poorly controlled diabetes, which aims to help these people gain better glycaemic control and reduce unscheduled care by targeting their social welfare, psychological problems and their medical needs in a truly integrated model of care. Patients who are eligible to receive the service are those with poorly controlled diabetes (HbA1c = >9%), who are experiencing problems in other areas of their lives (financial, social, psychological), and are residents in Southwark and Lambeth.
The service was piloted for 18 months from April 2010 to November 2011, funded entirely by the NHS London Regional Innovations Fund, and was successful in reducing patients HbA1c (a widely-used long-term measure of diabetes control) and increasing patient satisfaction. The service's success was recognised by the Quality in Care programme where it won 3 awards.
3DFD now has funding for another year, and we would like to conduct a health economic evaluation to ascertain if the service is cost-effective. This will involve taking clinical information from the patient records at baseline, and at 12 months into the service. We will also take psychological measures from the patient at the beginning of their treatment and again at the end of their treatment. The measures will take approximately 20 minutes.
We would also like to obtain routine data on a control group from the patient lists of GP surgeries in Lewisham in order to compare changes to those receiving the service. No identifying information would be needed from patients in the control group.
REC name
London - Brighton & Sussex Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
13/LO/0101
Date of REC Opinion
25 Jun 2013
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion