|
|
Post by spiro on Apr 12, 2015 19:17:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by pktrump on Apr 12, 2015 19:40:27 GMT -5
I would think this would also be of interest to insurance companies.
Most focus on the upfront cost comparison between AFZ and other RAAs but do
not factor in the real possibility of decreased complications from regular AFZ use (i.e. good
post prandial control).
|
|
|
|
Post by jmkopp on Apr 15, 2015 7:57:28 GMT -5
This to me is a major side benefit of the tighter range of blood sugars. My background is Physical Therapy and I treated a significant number of patients with Diabetic neuropathy. I don't think we fully understand the exact relationship yet which will always make it difficult for insurance companies to make decisions. I would hope insurance company start assessing long term costs of patients on Afrezza versus non-Afrezza patients. I believe they will see a significant trend down in a relatively short amount of time. It would be great as payors would start covering it more completely including the additional need for dosages above and beyond what is needed in the monthly packs.
|
|
