Health care economic analyses and value-based medicine

Lifetime cost-effectiveness of myopia control intervention for the children population

Background

Myopia is a common eye condition and projected to affect half of the global population by 2050. Controlling its progression during childhood may prevent associated ocular diseases in later life. Certain interventions retard myopia progression but their long-term costs and consequences are not well understood. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of myopia control via an optical approach using the Defocus Incorporated Multiple Segments (DIMS) lens over a lifetime.

Methods

We constructed an individual-based, state-transition model to simulate 1) the development and progression of myopia in childhood with and without control and 2) the impact of myopia on the development of four sight-threatening complications in adulthood. We compared strategies of myopia control with 100% uptake vs. no myopia control from the societal perspective to determine whether myopia control is value for money.

Results

With myopia control, the cumulative prevalence of high myopia was relatively reduced by 44.7% (5.9 vs. 10.7%) and severe visual impairment by 19.2% (2.2 vs. 2.7%) compared to no myopia control. The lifetime cost per quality-adjusted life year gained was 26 407 US dollars (USD) and is considered cost-effective compared to the threshold recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) of one times annual per capita gross domestic product (48 359 USD). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that myopia control had an 87% likelihood of being cost-effective at the WHO threshold.

Conclusions

Myopia control is cost-effective when provided to all eligible children. Further investigation is required to determine if it is cost-effective for the government to subsidise myopia control in order to maximise access.

A Comparison of Preferentially Expressed Antigen in Melanoma Immunohistochemistry and Diagnostic Gene Expression-Profiling Assay in Challenging Melanocytic Proliferations

ABSTRACT

Most melanocytic tumors are classified as benign or malignant based on clinical morphology, histology, and immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis. A subset of more challenging cases with ambiguous features may require further evaluation with established ancillary diagnostic molecular studies, including fluorescence in situ hybridization and/or single nucleotide polymorphism array, to increase diagnostic certainty. More recently, a diagnostic gene expression-profiling (GEP) assay and an IHC stain for the detection of PRAME (PReferentially expressed Antigen in MElanoma) have been developed. The use of PRAME IHC has been validated in cases of unequivocal and ambiguous melanocytic proliferations via comparing results with fluorescence in situ hybridization and/or single nucleotide polymorphism array. A study comparing performance metrics of PRAME IHC and diagnostic GEP has not been previously published. Herein, we evaluated the use of PRAME IHC in 55 melanocytic tumors with challenging histomorphology by comparing the results with diagnostic GEP and final histomorphologic diagnosis. Intertest agreement occurred in 88% of cases. PRAME IHC supported the final diagnosis in 89% of cases with a sensitivity of 79%, specificity of 95%, and positive predictive value of 88.2%. GEP agreed with the final diagnosis in 88% of cases with a sensitivity of 65%, 97% specificity, and positively predicted melanoma in 91.7% of cases. Because the results of this study align with past publications evaluating the performance metrics of PRAME IHC, showing it to be as sensitive as and more cost effective than all other ancillary molecular tests, we propose the use of PRAME IHC as the optimal first-line diagnostic tool for ambiguous melanocytic proliferations.

Quality of Life after Pars Plana Vitrectomy, Scleral Buckle, or Pneumatic Retinopexy for Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment: A Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Comparisons of the surgical and anatomic results of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment surgery have been investigated previously. A systematic evaluation of the available evidence comparing quality of life outcomes of either pars plana vitrectomy, scleral buckling, or pneumatic retinopexy has not been evaluated to date. This article analyzes whether pars plana vitrectomy, scleral buckling, or pneumatic retinopexy for the treatment of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment results in differing quality of life outcomes.

METHODS

In February of 2022, a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL, and Cochrane Library was conducted for studies on patients treated surgically for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment and included follow-up measurements of quality of life outcomes. Meta-analysis was completed using STATA v. 14.0. The main outcomes of interest were the mean vision-related quality of life score (VRQOL) and SD of VRQOL of each type of surgical procedure.

RESULTS

In this systematic review of 13 distinct trials including follow-up of patient quality of life after rhegmatogenous retinal detachment surgery (n = 1063), a better correlation was found between higher quality of life outcomes with scleral buckling than with pars plana vitrectomy (SMD = 0.62, CI: [0.31, 0.93]). There was also no signficant difference in quality of life outcomes between pneumatic retinopexy and pars plana vitrectomy (SMD = 0.08, CI: [-0.07, 0.22]).

CONCLUSIONS

Scleral buckling results in better quality of life outcomes for patients when compared to pars plana vitrectomy. Pneumatic retinopexy did not show a difference in quality of life outcomes compared to pars plana vitrectomy.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Pegcetacoplan for the Treatment of Geographic Atrophy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the treatment of geography atrophy (GA) with intravitreal pegcetacoplan and to identify utility-measurement surrogates.

DESIGN

Cost analysis based on data from a published study.

SUBJECTS

None; based on data from published sham control compared with 2 treatment groups in the index study.

METHODS

Costs were based on 2022 Medicare reimbursement data. Specific outcomes were extrapolated from the DERBY and OAKS trials. Assumptions were made for the lifetime analysis based on a theoretical logistic growth model of the atrophy.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Cost, cost utility, cost per quality-adjusted life-year, and cost per area of GA (in US$).

RESULTS

The costs to treat GA in every month (EM) and every-other-month (EOM) treatment groups over the 2 years as reported were $70 000 and $34 600, respectively. The costs per area of delaying GA for 2 years in all patients were $87 300/mm2 (EM) and $49 200/mm2 (EOM), and in initially extrafoveal patients, $53 900/mm2 (EM) and $32 100/mm2 (EOM). The costs per day of delaying GA for 2 years were $295 (EM) and $170 (EOM); the marginal cost (EM vs. EOM) per retinal pigment epithelium cell saved was $30. The modeled lifetime costs were $350 000 (EM) and $172 000 (EOM), or $309 000/mm2 (EM) and $180 000 (EOM) /mm2. The modeled time to 95% atrophy at 13 years was delayed by 2.5 years (EM) and 2.1 years (EOM). The costs/quality-adjusted life-year gained based on modeled visual loss with 95% atrophy were $706 000 (EM) and $397 000 (EOM).

CONCLUSION

Treatment of GA with intravitreal pegcetacoplan EOM was more cost effective than EM. Treatment of extrafoveal lesions yielded greater utility than the treatment of the entire group. As atrophy progression approaches an upper limit, the marginal cost/benefit ratios increase.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Direct medical costs of globe salvage in group C-E retinoblastoma and implications for cost-effectiveness

PURPOSE

To determine the direct medical costs and cost-effectiveness of globe salvage compared with primary enucleation in patients with advanced retinoblastoma.

METHODS

Patients with International Classification of Retinoblastoma groups C-E retinoblastoma at a single institution from 2001 to 2021 were categorized into two groups: primary enucleation and globe salvage. Hospital visits and treatments were compared to determine differences in care utilization. Costs per encounter were derived from billing data and multiplied by number of encounters to determine total costs in the first year of treatment. Groups were stratified by unilateral or bilateral retinoblastoma, and visual acuity-based utility values were used to compare quality-adjusted life years to determine cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

Of 74 group C-E eyes of 70 patients, 55 eyes underwent primary enucleation and 19 eyes underwent globe salvage, 12 of which ultimately underwent secondary enucleation. Patients who underwent globe salvage had higher usage of systemic chemotherapy (P = 0.001), more examinations under anesthesia (P < 0.001), fewer outpatient visits (P = 0.03), and a higher total cost of care (301,151 vs 104,764 USD [P < 0.001]) in the first year of treatment compared with the primary enucleation group. At an average life expectancy of 76 years, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 118,347 USD per QALY in unilateral retinoblastoma and 32,987 USD per QALY in bilateral retinoblastoma, meeting the <150,000 USD/QALY threshold of cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Incurring additional costs may save the eye in advanced retinoblastoma, but the possibility of secondary enucleation should be disclosed for informed decision making. Despite this risk, globe salvage was cost-effective in unilateral and bilateral retinoblastoma.

Cost-Utility of Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment Repair With Pars Plana Vitrectomy, Scleral Buckle, and Pneumatic Retinopexy: A Microsimulation Model

PURPOSE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of primary noncomplex rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) repair, comparing 3 different strategies, pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), scleral buckle (SB), and pneumatic retinopexy (PnR) from the health care payer perspective over a lifetime.

DESIGN

Model-based cost-utility analysis.

METHODS

A simulated cohort of 100,000 adult patients (≥18 years old) requiring primary noncomplex RRD repair in theoretical surgical centers in the United States. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), lifetime costs (2022 United States dollars), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the 3 interventions were projected over a lifetime horizon, with a cost-effectiveness threshold of ≤$50,000 per gained QALY.

RESULTS

Based on inputted parameters, the primary anatomical success was highest for PPV (95.00%) compared to SB (91.76%) and PnR (63.41%). The QALYs associated with PPV, SB, and PnR were (11.87, SD 1.62), (11.84, SD 1.63), and (11.59, SD 1.72), respectively. The incurred lifetime costs of RRD repair and associated postoperative surgeries for PPV, SB, and PnR were $4445.72 (SD 655.75), $4518.04 (662.92), and $3978.45 (728.50), respectively. Parameter-level simulations suggested that PPV was most likely to be the most cost-effective therapy compared to SB and PnR beyond a threshold of $3000/QALY. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for PPV compared to PnR was $1693.54. SB was dominant in all scenarios. Threshold analyses indicated that the success rate of PnR would have to be 100% and/or the cost would have to be $2000 or less over lifetime for it to be more cost-effective than PPV.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found PPV to be the most cost-effective primary procedure for RRD repair at a threshold of $50,000/QALY gained over a lifetime horizon from the health care payer perspective.

Prevention Surpasses Treatment: 5-year Follow-Up, Cost-Utility, and Cost-Benefit of Zeaxanthin Therapy for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration

INTRODUCTION

Oral administration of zeaxanthin (Zx) 20 mg daily in patients with unilateral neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) treated with triple therapy (photodynamic therapy/intravitreal bevacizumab/intravitreal dexamethasone) reduced fellow-eye 2-year nAMD incidence from 23 to 6% (p = 0.02) in a prior clinical trial. We questioned the long-term benefit and thus analyzed case-control 5-year patient data of trial participants and additional participants with 5-year follow-up, also performing cost-utility and cost-benefit analyses.

METHODS

Consecutive, unilateral nAMD patient outcomes for those taking 20 mg Zx supplementation orally for ≥ 5 years were compared with the Comparison of AMD Treatments Trials (CATT) 5-year historical controls for fellow-eye nAMD conversion. Eleven-year mean life expectancy, cost-utility and cost-benefit models were undertaken employing a 3% discount rate and 2020 US real dollars.

RESULTS

Among 227 consecutive patients with nAMD/Zx-supplementation, 202 (90%) had 5-year follow-up. The fellow-eye nAMD 5-year conversion incidence using a Kaplan-Meier cumulative event estimate was 22% (49/227), versus 48% (167/348) with CATT control data (p < 0.0001). An 11-year cost-utility model with estimates for years 6-11 demonstrated a 0.42 (7.7%) QALY (quality-adjusted life-year) gain, including 3 months of life saved per patient due to decreased nAMD fellow-eye conversion. This yielded a direct ophthalmic medical cost perspective, incremental cost-utility ratio (CUR) of -$576/QALY and a societal cost perspective CUR of -$125,071/QALY. Zx supplementation for all 2020 US unilateral nAMD cases would have theoretically saved society, primarily patients, $6.0 billion over 11 years, a 1531% return on investment (ROI), or 31.3% annual ROI, on Zx costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral zeaxanthin supplementation for unilateral nAMD patients appears to decrease fellow-eye long-term incidence and is cost-effective and financially rewarding. It is dominant vs. no supplementation in patients presenting with unilateral nAMD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01527435.

Cost-effectiveness of Aflibercept Monotherapy vs Bevacizumab First Followed by Aflibercept If Needed for Diabetic Macular Edema

Importance

The DRCR Retina Network Protocol AC showed no significant difference in visual acuity outcomes over 2 years between treatment with aflibercept monotherapy and bevacizumab first with switching to aflibercept for suboptimal response in treating diabetic macular edema (DME). Understanding the estimated cost and cost-effectiveness of these approaches is important.

Objective

To evaluate the cost and cost-effectiveness of aflibercept monotherapy vs bevacizumab-first strategies for DME treatment.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This economic evaluation was a preplanned secondary analysis of a US randomized clinical trial of participants aged 18 years or older with center-involved DME and best-corrected visual acuity of 20/50 to 20/320 enrolled from December 15, 2017, through November 25, 2019.

Interventions

Aflibercept monotherapy or bevacizumab first, switching to aflibercept in eyes with protocol-defined suboptimal response.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Between February and July 2022, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) over 2 years was assessed. Efficacy and resource utilization data from the randomized clinical trial were used with health utility mapping from the literature and Medicare unit costs.

Results

This study included 228 participants (median age, 62 [range, 34-91 years; 116 [51%] female and 112 [49%] male; 44 [19%] Black or African American, 60 [26%] Hispanic or Latino, and 117 [51%] White) with 1 study eye. The aflibercept monotherapy group included 116 participants, and the bevacizumab-first group included 112, of whom 62.5% were eventually switched to aflibercept. Over 2 years, the cost of aflibercept monotherapy was $26 504 (95% CI, $24 796-$28 212) vs $13 929 (95% CI, $11 984-$15 874) for the bevacizumab-first group, a difference of $12 575 (95% CI, $9987-$15 163). The aflibercept monotherapy group gained 0.015 (95% CI, -0.011 to 0.041) QALYs using the better-seeing eye and had an ICER of $837 077 per QALY gained compared with the bevacizumab-first group. Aflibercept could be cost-effective with an ICER of $100 000 per QALY if the price per dose were $305 or less or the price of bevacizumab was $1307 per dose or more.

Conclusions and Relevance

Variability in individual needs will influence clinician and patient decisions about how to treat specific eyes with DME. While the bevacizumab-first group costs still averaged approximately $14 000 over 2 years, this approach, as used in this study, may confer substantial cost savings on a societal level without sacrificing visual acuity gains over 2 years compared with aflibercept monotherapy.

The Basic VRS-Effect Study: Clinical Trial Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness of Low Vision Rehabilitation in Portugal

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was twofold: (1) to investigate the clinical impact of vision rehabilitation in patients with vision impairment and (2) to investigate the cost-effectiveness of a basic vision rehabilitation service in Portugal.

METHODS

The trial recruited patients diagnosed with age-related macular degeneration or diabetic retinopathy (DR) and visual acuity in the range 0.4-1.0logMAR in the better-seeing eye. Participants were randomised to one of the study arms consisting of immediate intervention and delayed intervention. The intervention included: new refractive correction, optical reading aids, in-office training and advice about modifications at home. Visual ability, health-related quality of life and costs were measured. Economic analysis was performed to evaluate whether the intervention was cost-effective. The trial compared the outcomes 12 weeks after the start in both arms.

RESULTS

Of the 46 participants, 34 (74%) were diagnosed with DR, 25 (54%) were female, and mean age was 70.08 years (SD = 8.74). In the immediate intervention arm visual ability increased a mean of 0.523 logits (SE = 0.11) (p < 0.001). Changes in the delayed intervention arm were not statistically significant (p = 0.95). Acuity in the better-seeing eye, near acuity and critical print size also improved during the study. The mean cost of the intervention was €118.79 (SD = 24.37). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio using the EQ-5D-5L was 30,421€/QALY and 1186€/QALY when using near acuity.

CONCLUSION

The current study gives evidence of positive clinical impact of a basic vision rehabilitation intervention and shows that a basic vision rehabilitation service is cost-effective. These findings are important to clinical and rehabilitation practices and for planning vision rehabilitation services.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Retrospectively registered, 21/01/2019. ISRCTN10894889, https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN10894889.

Integration of art and technology in personalized radiation oncology care: Experiences, evidence, and perspectives

Cancer diagnoses expose patients to traumatic stress, sudden changes in daily life, changes in the body and autonomy, with even long-term consequences, and in some cases, to come to terms with the end-of-life. Furthermore, rising survival rates underline that the need for interventions for emotional wellbeing is in growing demand by patients and survivors. Cancer patients frequently have compliance problems, difficulties during treatment, stress, or challenges in implementing healthy behaviors. This scenario was highlighted during the COVID-19 emergency. These issues often do not reach the clinical attention of dedicated professionals and could also become a source of stress or burnout for professionals. So, these consequences are evident on individual, interpersonal, and health system levels. Oncology services have increasingly sought to provide value-based health care, considering resources invested, with implications for service delivery and related financing mechanisms. Value-based health care can improve patient outcomes, often revealed by patient outcome measures while seeking balance with economical budgets. The paper aims to show the Gemelli Advanced Radiation Therapy (ART) experience of personalizing the patients' care pathway through interventions based on technologies and art, the personalized approach to cancer patients and their role as "co-stars" in treatment care. The paper describes the vision, experiences, and evidence that have guided clinical choices involving patients and professionals in a co-constructed therapeutic pathway. We will explore this approach by describing: the various initiatives already implemented and prospects, with particular attention to the economic sustainability of the paths proposed to patients; the several pathways of personalized care, both from the patient's and healthcare professional perspective, that put the person's experience at the Gemelli ART Center. The patient's satisfaction with the treatment and economic outcomes have been considered. The experiences and future perspectives described in the manuscript will focus on the value of people's experiences and patient satisfaction indicators, patients, staff, and the healthcare organization.

Cost-effectiveness of Universal School- and Community-Based Vision Testing Strategies to Detect Amblyopia in Children in Ontario, Canada

IMPORTANCE

Screening for amblyopia in primary care visits is recommended for young children, yet screening rates are poor. Although the prevalence of amblyopia is low (3%-5%) among young children, universal screening in schools and mandatory optometric examinations may improve vision care, but the cost-effectiveness of these vision testing strategies compared with the standard in primary care is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of universal school screening and mandated optometric examinations compared with standard care vision screening in primary care visits in Toronto, Canada, with the aim of detecting and facilitating treatment of amblyopia and amblyopia risk factors from the Ontario government's perspective.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

An economic evaluation was conducted from July 2019 to May 2021 using a Markov model to compare 15-year costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) between school screening and optometric examination compared with primary care screening in Toronto, Canada. Parameters were derived from published literature, the Ontario Schedule of Benefits and Fees, and the Kindergarten Vision Testing Program. A hypothetical cohort of 25 000 children aged 3 to 5 years was simulated. It was assumed that children in the cohort had irreversible vision impairment if not diagnosed by an optometrist. In addition, incremental costs and outcomes of 0 were adjusted to favor the reference strategy. Vision testing programs were designed to detect amblyopia and amblyopia risk factors.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

For each strategy, the mean costs per child included the costs of screening, optometric examinations, and treatment. The mean health benefits (QALYs) gained were informed by the presence of vision impairment and the benefits of treatment. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated for each alternative strategy relative to the standard primary care screening strategy as the additional cost required to achieve an additional QALY at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000 Canadian dollars (CAD) ($37 690) per QALY gained.

RESULTS

School screening relative to primary care screening yielded cost savings of CAD $84.09 (95% CI, CAD $82.22-$85.95) (US $63.38 [95% CI, US $61.97-$64.78]) per child and an incremental gain of 0.0004 (95% CI, -0.0047 to 0.0055) QALYs per child. Optometric examinations relative to primary care screening yielded cost savings of CAD $74.47 (95% CI, CAD $72.90-$76.03) (US $56.13 [95% CI, $54.95-$57.30]) per child and an incremental gain of 0.0508 (95% CI, 0.0455-0.0561) QALYs per child. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of CAD $50 000 (US $37 690) per QALY gained, school screening and optometric examinations were cost-effective relative to primary care screening in only 20% and 29% of iterations, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, because amblyopia prevalence is low among young children and most children in the hypothetical cohort had healthy vision, universal school screening and optometric examinations were not cost-effective relative to primary care screening for detecting amblyopia in young children in Toronto, Canada. The mean added health benefits of school screening and optometric examinations compared with primary care screening did not warrant the resources used.

Healthcare expenditure of intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors compared with dexamethasone implant for diabetic macular oedema

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to estimate the 1-year costs associated with treating diabetic macular oedema (DME) patients using current intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) biologics compared with the dexamethasone implant.

METHODS

We conducted a descriptive cost-evaluation analysis using data from Oslo University Hospital and literature to compare three different intravitreal drugs for DME: bevacizumab, aflibercept and dexamethasone. Stratification of patients into 'Naive' or 'Switch' group was based on treatment history. We estimated the costs from healthcare and 'extended' healthcare perspectives. Sensitivity analysis evaluated the impact of various parameters.

RESULTS

The average injections per patient per year for the Naive group (bevacizumab), Switch group (aflibercept) and dexamethasone were 9.5, 9.1 and 3.0 respectively. From a healthcare perspective, the 1-year costs for the Naive group were 15% lower (bevacizumab, €3619), and for the Switch group, 23% higher (aflibercept, €5226) compared with dexamethasone (€4252). The 'extended' healthcare perspective showed the cost per patient per year for bevacizumab remained nominally lower in the Naive group, while dexamethasone remained lower for the Switch group (€5116 for dexamethasone, compared to €4987 for bevacizumab and €6537 for aflibercept).

CONCLUSIONS

From a primary healthcare perspective, the dexamethasone as a first-line DME treatment may increase economic costs in settings where bevacizumab is used off-label. Treating resistant DMEwith dexamethasone may reduce the costs and treatment burden compared with switching to aflibercept.

Healthcare Providers’ Knowledge of Value-Based Care in Germany: An Adapted, Mixed-Methods Approach

Background: Value-Based Care (VBC) is being discussed to provide better outcomes to patients, with an aim to reimburse healthcare providers (HCPs) based on the quality of care they deliver. Little is known about German HCPs’ knowledge of VBC. This study aims to investigate the knowledge of HCPs of VBC and to identify potential needs for further education toward implementation of VBC in Germany. Methods: For evidence generation, we performed a literature search and conducted an online survey among HCPs at 89 hospitals across Germany. The questionnaire was based on published evidence and co-developed with an expert panel using a mixed methods approach. Results: We found HCPs to believe that VBC is more applicable in surgery than internal medicine and that well-defined cycles of care are essential for its application. HCPs believe that VBC can reduce health care costs significantly. However, they also assume that implementing VBC will be challenging. Conclusions: The concept in general is well perceived, however, HCPs do not want to participate in any financial risk sharing. Installing an authority/independent agency that measures achieved value, digital transformation, and that improves the transition between the inpatient and the outpatient sectors are top interests of HCPs.

Opportunity Cost of Retinal Detachment Surgery vs Office-Based Patient Care

Purpose: This work compares physician reimbursements for retinal detachment (RD) surgery with office-based patient care. Methods: A theoretical model was constructed from the physician’s perspective for performing a 90-minute uncomplicated RD surgery with its associated perioperative work in the global period (Current Procedural Terminology code 67108) compared with managing 40 patients per 8-hour clinic day in the equivalent time period. The reimbursement rates were based on the 2019 values set by the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Sensitivity analyses were performed varying the perioperative times, clinical productivity, and postoperative visits. Results: The CMS physician reimbursement rate for 67108 surgery was 17.13 work relative value units (wRVUs); meanwhile, the physician in the reference case could have generated 40.89 wRVUs in the office. CMS reimbursement therefore represented a 58% opportunity cost relative to lost office productivity for the physician. A significant disparity was still present even when modeling 30 patients per day. In sensitivity analyses, clinical productivity exceeded surgical compensation in 99% of modeled scenarios. In threshold analyses, the surgeon in the reference case would have to complete the surgery and all immediate perioperative care within 18 minutes to equal the total CMS valuation. Conclusions: CMS reimbursement for RD surgery resulted in a significant opportunity cost for the physician relative to office-based patient care, which was more pronounced for more efficient clinicians in the office. The sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of the model. Reductions in surgery reimbursements relative to office-based patient care might disincentivize busy clinicians.

Patient-Reported Measures of the Effects of Vision Impairments and Low Vision Rehabilitation on Functioning in Daily Life

The quantification of vision impairments dates to the mid-nineteenth century with standardization of visual acuity and visual field measures in the eye clinic. Attempts to quantify the impact of vision impairments on patients' lives did not receive clinical attention until the close of the twentieth century. Although formal psychometric theories and measurement instruments were well developed and commonplace in educational testing, as well as in various areas in psychology and rehabilitation medicine, the late start applying them to clinical vision research created a vacuum that invited poorly developed and poorly functioning instruments and analytic methods. Although this research is still burdened with legacy instruments, mandates by regulatory agencies to include the patients' perspectives and preferences in the evaluation of clinical outcomes have stimulated the development and validation of self-report instruments grounded in modern psychometric theory and methods. Here I review the progress and accomplishments of applying modern psychometrics to clinical vision research. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Vision Science, Volume 8 is September 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Quality-adjusted life years in macular oedema due to age-related macular degeneration, diabetes and central retinal vein occlusion: the impact of anti-VEGF agents in a tertiary centre in Greece

INTRODUCTION

Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), diabetic macular oedema (DME), and macular oedema due to central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) are leading causes of vision loss, currently managed with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections (anti-VEGF). The aim of this study was to calculate QALYs in patients with nAMD, DME, and CRVO treated with anti-VEGF agents (QALYs⁺) in a Greek tertiary hospital setting and compare them to theoretical QALYs that the patients would have without treatment (QALYs^-).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study included 143 treatment-naive patients with macular oedema due to nAMD (n = 79), DME (n = 57), and CRVO (n = 7), who received anti-VEGF injections as monotherapy according to the Treat-and-Extend (T&E) protocol. The anti-VEGF agents were ranibizumab and aflibercept in equivalent fractions. QALYs where calculated by the formula QALY = Utility Value × Time, where "Time" refers to the follow-up period of the study. For QALYs^-, we assumed that visual acuity remained unchanged during this period.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up time was 1.3 ± 1.2 years in the nAMD group, 1 ± 1.3 years in the DME group, and 0.5 ± 1 years in the CRVO group. There was no statistically significant difference between QALYs^- and QALYs⁺ in all three ocular pathologies for the study period (p > 0.05 for each of the three statistical tests performed).

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

Possible explanations for the lack of significant difference between QALYs - and QALYs + in nAMD, DME, and CRVO groups, may be the short time horizon used in this analysis, the inclusion of data from the better-seeing eye (BSE) and the specific socio-economic, geographical and health care characteristics of this rural Greek area.

Five-Year Cost-Effectiveness Modeling of Primary Care-Based, Nonmydriatic Automated Retinal Image Analysis Screening Among Low-Income Patients With Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence-based technology systems offer an alternative solution for diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening compared with standard, in-office dilated eye examinations. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of Automated Retinal Image Analysis System (ARIAS)-based DR screening in a primary care medicine clinic that serves a low-income patient population.

METHODS

A model-based, cost-effectiveness analysis of two DR screening systems was created utilizing data from a recent study comparing adherence rates to follow-up eye care among adults ages 18 or older with a clinical diagnosis of diabetes. In the study, the patients were prescreened with an ARIAS-based, nonmydriatic (undilated), point-of-care tool in the primary care setting and were compared with patients with diabetes who were referred for dilated retinal screening without prescreening, as is the current standard of care. Using a Markov model with microsimulation resulting in a total of 600 000 simulated patient experiences, we calculated the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of the two screening approaches, with regard to five-year cost-effectiveness of DR screening and treatment of vision-threatening DR.

RESULTS

At five years, ARIAS-based screening showed similar utility as the standard of care screening systems. However, ARIAS reduced costs by 23.3%, with an ICUR of $258 721.81 comparing the current practice to ARIAS.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary care-based ARIAS DR screening is cost-effective when compared with standard of care screening methods.

Comparison of the Cost-Effectiveness of SMILE, FS-LASIK, and PRK for Myopia in a Private Eye Center in Spain

PURPOSE

To describe and compare the cost-effectiveness of small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE), femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK), and photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) for treating myopia and myopic astigmatism in a private eye center.

METHODS

The perspectives for this cost-effectiveness analysis were for the payer and the health care sector. For the payer's perspective, a decision tree model was made, with a time period of 30 years, and the average weighted utility values and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) were computed for each procedure. The average weighted costs were derived for each procedure and divided by the QALY to obtain the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). For the health care sector's perspective, the direct and indirect costs of acquiring the equipment and maintaining the facilities-including consumables and personnel salaries-were obtained to compute the minimum number of patients treated per year.

RESULTS

The weighted utility values were 0.8 for SMILE and PRK and 0.77 for FS-LASIK. The weighted QALYs were 24 for SMILE and PRK, and 23.1 for FS-LASIK. The average weighted costs were 335.45, 443, and 346.96€, respectively. The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were 13.98 €/QALY for SMILE, 18.46 €/QALY for PRK, and 15.02 €/QALY for FS-LASIK. There was a negative correlation between the ICER and the time (in years) after the surgery. To achieve a profit, the minimum number of patients treated per year is 155 for SMILE, 136 for PRK, and 155 for FS-LASIK.

CONCLUSIONS

Laser corneal refractive surgery is cost-effective for a person desirous of refractive correction for myopia. SMILE had the lowest ICER, followed by FS-LASIK and PRK. This trend was noted at all time periods. The cost of investing in laser refractive surgery facilities is outweighed by the potential income in high-volume eye centers. [J Refract Surg. 2022;38(1):21-26.].

Cost-analysis of Surgical Intraocular Pressure Management in Glaucoma

PRCIS

The multiplicity of treatment options for lowering intraocular pressure (IOP) is both a blessing and a challenge. Some attention to cost-analysis might assist in choosing an optimal therapy, especially in a cost-constrained, international setting.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to quantify and to analyze the relative cost of various glaucoma surgical procedures and selective laser trabeculoplasty surgery per mm Hg IOP reduction ($/mm Hg) since standard cost-utility methods are not well suited to the study of glaucoma which characteristically only claims visual acuity in its end stages.

METHODS

Published glaucoma treatment studies were reviewed to quantitate the reduction of mean IOP and glaucoma medications for a given treatment modality. A US perspective was adopted, using Medicare allowable costs were used to calculate a newly introduced parameter-cost per mm Hg IOP reduction-at 1 year postoperatively.

RESULTS

The cost per mm Hg IOP reduction after 1 year of treatment ranged from $190/mm Hg for trabeculectomy to $1376/mm Hg for iStent. For reference, the cost of selective later trabeculoplasty surgery was $121/mm Hg. After the first year, cost/mm Hg ranged from $12 to $61/mm Hg.

CONCLUSIONS

Conventional glaucoma surgeries and selective laser trabeculoplasty surgery were the most cost-efficient surgical methods to lower IOP compared with the various minimally invasive glaucoma surgeries options. They may be more appropriate management when cost is an important issue.

Patient-reported outcome and experience measures for peripheral venous catheters: a scoping review protocol

PURPOSE

The purpose of this scoping review is to conduct a systematic search and establish the current state of evidence for tools and instruments used to measure self-reported outcomes and experiences, including satisfaction scores, specifically for peripheral venous access devices (PVADs).

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature will be conducted using medical databases including: MEDLINE (Ovid); CINAHL (EbscoHost); PubMed (NCBI); and Scopus (Elsevier); Google (Scholar); and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Experimental, and observational studies, published in English, after 1990 will be eligible for inclusion if they: consist of (i) a survey, instrument or tool that is designed to (ii) collect outcome, experience and/or satisfaction data, relating to PVAD insertion, care, maintenance and/or removal, among (iii) adult and paediatric participants.

CONCLUSIONS

PVAD-specific patient-reported outcome and experience measures are necessary for researchers, clinicians and policy decision makers to explore more thoroughly the quality of PVAD care provided, and further inform health economic analyses in the context of quality improvement interventions for vascular access devices. This scoping review will establish the existence-or paucity-of instruments to measure these selfreported outcomes and experiences of PVADs, in order to guide value-based healthcare delivery into the future.

Cost-effectiveness of Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty versus penetrating keratoplasty in patients with endothelial dysfunction in India

Purpose:

The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness and perform cost-utility analysis of Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) vs. penetrating keratoplasty (PK) in Indian population.

Methods:

This was an institutional, ambispective, observational study. Patients who underwent PK or DSAEK for endothelial dysfunction were included and followed up for 2 years; those with other ocular comorbidities were excluded. The analysis was performed from the patient’s perspective receiving subsidized treatment at a tertiary care hospital. Detailed history, ophthalmic examination, total expenditure by patient, and clinical outcomes were recorded. The main outcome measures were best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), graft survival (Kaplan–Meier survival estimates), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR). Utility values were based on quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with visual acuity outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software package, version 12.1; a value of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results:

A total of 120 patients (PK: 60, DSAEK: 60) were included. At 2 years, for a similar logMAR BSCVA, [PK (0.32 ± 0.02), DSAEK (0.25 ± 0.02); P = 0.078], the overall cost for PK (13511.1 ± 803.3 INR) was significantly more than DSAEK (11092.9 ± 492.1 INR) (difference = 1952.6 INR; P = 0.01). ICER of DSAEK relative to PK was –39,052 INR for improvement in 1 logMAR unit BSCVA. ICUR of DSAEK relative to PK was –1,95,260 INR for improvement in 1 QALY.

Conclusion:

DSAEK was more cost-effective than PK in patients with endothelial dysfunction at 2 years.

Economic Evaluations of Artificial Intelligence in Ophthalmology

ABSTRACT

Artificial intelligence (AI) is expected to cause significant medical quality enhancements and cost-saving improvements in ophthalmology. Although there has been a rapid growth of studies on AI in the recent years, real-world adoption of AI is still rare. One reason may be because the data derived from economic evaluations of AI in health care, which policy makers used for adopting new technology, have been fragmented and scarce. Most data on economics of AI in ophthalmology are from diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening. Few studies classified costs of AI software, which has been considered as a medical device, into direct medical costs. These costs of AI are composed of initial and maintenance costs. The initial costs may include investment in research and development, and costs for validation of different datasets. Meanwhile, the maintenance costs include costs for algorithms upgrade and hardware maintenance in the long run. The cost of AI should be balanced between manufacturing price and reimbursements since it may pose significant challenges and barriers to providers. Evidence from cost-effectiveness analyses showed that AI, either standalone or used with humans, was more cost-effective than manual DR screening. Notably, economic evaluation of AI for DR screening can be used as a model for AI to other ophthalmic diseases.

Enabling Guidelines for the Adoption of eHealth Solutions: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Globally, public health care is under increasing pressure, an economic burden currently amplified by the COVID-19 outbreak. With the recognition that universal health coverage improves the health of a population and reduces health inequalities, universal health coverage has been acknowledged as a priority goal. To meet the global needs in a population with increased chronic illness and longer life expectancy, the health care system is in dire need of new, emerging technologies. eHealth solutions as a method of delivery may have an impact on quality of care and health care costs. As such, it is important to study methods previously used to avoid suboptimal implementation and promote general guidelines to further develop eHealth solutions.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to explore and thematically categorize a selected representation of early phase studies on eHealth technologies, focusing on papers that are under development or undergoing testing. Further, we want to assess enablers and barriers in terms of usability, scaling, and data management of eHealth implementation. The aim of this study to explore early development phase and feasibility studies was an intentional effort to provide applicable guidelines for evaluation at different stages of implementation.

METHODS

A structured search was performed in PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane to identify and provide insight in current eHealth technology and methodology under development and gain insight in the future potential of eHealth technologies.

RESULTS

In total, 27 articles were included in this review. The clinical studies were categorized thematically by illness comparing 4 technology types deemed relevant: apps/web-based technology, sensor technology, virtual reality, and television. All eHealth assessment and implementation studies were categorized by their focus point: usability, scaling, or data management. Studies assessing the effect of eHealth were divided into feasibility studies, qualitative studies, and heuristic assessments. Studies focusing on usability (16/27) mainly addressed user involvement and learning curve in the adoption of eHealth, while the majority of scaling studies (6/27) focused on strategic and organizational aspects of upscaling eHealth solutions. Studies focusing on data management (5/27) addressed data processing and data sensitivity in adoption and diffusion of eHealth. Efficient processing of data in a secure manner, as well as user involvement and feedback, both throughout small studies and during upscaling, were the important enablers considered for successful implementation of eHealth.

CONCLUSIONS

eHealth interventions have considerable potential to improve lifestyle changes and adherence to treatment recommendations. To promote efficient implementation and scaling, user involvement to promote user-friendliness, secure and adaptable data management, and strategical considerations needs to be addressed early in the development process. eHealth should be assessed during its development into health services. The wide variation in interventions and methodology makes comparison of the results challenging and calls for standardization of methods.

Comparing the efficacy and safety of femtosecond laser-assisted vs conventional penetrating keratoplasty: a meta-analysis of comparative studies

PURPOSE

To investigate the safety and efficacy of femtosecond laser-assisted penetrating keratoplasty (FLAK) versus conventional penetrating keratoplasty (CPK).

METHODS

A literature search of PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, and Clinicaltrials.gov was conducted for comparative studies published from January 2007 to October 2019. Studies that involved both FLAK and CPK groups and reported on the relevant efficacy and/or safety parameters were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale was used to analyse the methodological quality of these studies. Further, weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

From the screened articles, a total of 1991 eyes from nine comparative studies were included. FLAK was not statistically superior for twelve-month postoperative best corrected visual acuity (WMD = - 0.06; 95% CI [- 0.16, 0.04]; P = 0.22), corneal astigmatism (WMD = - 0.81; 95% CI [- 1.63, 0.01]; P = 0.05) or six-month postoperative uncorrected visual acuity (WMD = - 0.11; 95% CI [- 0.27, 0.06]; P = 0.21). There were no significant differences in corneal graft rejection rate and the graft failure between FLAK and CPK at twelve months postoperative. However, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and corneal astigmatism corrected with FLAK were better than those with CPK six months postoperative after elimination of data heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

Visual outcomes improvement in FLAK was better than that in CPK at six months postoperative, but not twelve months postoperative. This review recommends selecting a technique based on patients' work demands and economic burdens.

Gene editing technology: Towards precision medicine in inherited retinal diseases

Purpose: To review preclinical and clinical advances in gene therapy, with a focus on gene editing technologies, and application to inherited retinal disease.Methods: A narrative overview of the literature, summarizing the state-of-the-art in clinical gene therapy for inherited retinal disease, as well as the science and application of new gene editing technology.Results: The last three years has seen the first FDA approval of an in vivo gene replacement therapy for a hereditary blinding eye disease and, recently, the first clinical application of an in vivo gene editing technique. Limitations and challenges in this evolving field are highlighted, as well as new technologies developed to address the multitude of molecular mechanisms of disease.Conclusion: Genetic therapy for the treatment of inherited retinal disease is a rapidly expanding area of ophthalmology. New technologies have revolutionized the field of genome engineering and rekindled an interest in precision medicines for these conditions.

Early Conversion to Aflibercept for Persistent Diabetic Macular Edema Results in Better Visual Outcomes and Lower Treatment Costs

Purpose

To evaluate the functional and anatomic outcomes, as well as cost-effectiveness, of the timing of conversion to intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) in patients with treatment-resistant diabetic macular edema (DME).

Methods

Thirty consecutive eyes (25 patients) were identified that were treated with ≥3 intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB) and/or ranibizumab (IVR) injections prior to treatment with ≥3 IVA injections. Eyes that received ≤6 IVB and/or IVR injections (early-switch) were compared to those that received ≥7 injections (late-switch) prior to conversion to IVA. Treatment effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). A micro-simulation model examined the impact of treatment duration on outcomes.

Results

Early- (n=18) and late- (n=12) switch eyes had similar vision prior to conversion to IVA. Despite improvements in retinal thickness, only the early-switch eyes maintained vision gains after conversion to IVA through the end of follow-up (p=0.027). Early switch saved $22,884/eye and produced an additional 0.027 QALYs.

Conclusion

Early conversion to IVA optimizes vision outcomes and results in lower overall treatment expenditures.

Biopsychosocial variations in quality of life outcome following microdiscectomy

Background

Lumbar microdiscectomy is one of the most frequently performed neurosurgical procedures. In this review, we ask why patients' outcomes vary so widely even within the same unit, with the same surgeon performing the procedure and utilizing the technique?

Methods

In a cohort of 87 patients, we investigated how/whether multiple patient variables impacted outcomes following single-level lumbar microdiscectomy. We studied whether early surgical intervention improved the patients' quality of life (QOL) versus late intervention. Furthermore, we assessed other variables that could influence patient-perceived improvement. Preoperatively and postoperatively, we additionally utilized the following internationally standardized questionnaires (EQ-5D, Oswestry, and Core Outcome Measures Index [COMI]).

Results

A generalized substantial improvement in QOL was identified throughout the cohort population (<0.05). There was no difference in health measurement scores for those undergoing early versus late surgery. However, there was a statistically significant improvement in all QOL scores for privately insured patients versus publicly insured patients (e.g., on COMI, EQ-5D, and ODI Scores).

Conclusion

There was no objective statistically significant difference in QOL health scores between patients undergoing early versus late surgical lumbar microdiscectomy. This would suggest that the length of time patients is symptomatic before surgery did not significantly impact postoperative outcome. Of interest, however, was the difference in QOL health scores for private versus public patients suggesting that there are more subjective, complex, and psychosocial issues that influence outcome.

Cost-Utility of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Treatment for Macular Edema Secondary to Central Retinal Vein Occlusion

PURPOSE

To evaluate the cost-utility of treatment for macular edema in central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) using intravitreal injections of the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and aflibercept.

DESIGN

Decision analysis model of cost-utility.

PARTICIPANTS

Data from study participants in the Lucentis, Eylea, Avastin in Vein Occlusion (LEAVO) study.

METHODS

A decision analysis of a disease simulation model was used to calculate comparative cost-utility of intravitreal bevacizumab (IVB), intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR), and intravitreal aflibercept (IVA) for the treatment of macular edema associated with CRVO based on data from the LEAVO study. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services data were used to calculate associated modeled costs in a hospital- or facility-based and nonfacility setting from a third-party payer perspective, and societal costs also were calculated. Cost utility was calculated based on the preserved visual utility during the 2 years of the study and also by estimating utility for the expected lifetime.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Cost of treatment, cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

RESULTS

From the third-party payer perspective, the estimated lifetime costs per QALY in the facility and nonfacility settings were $39 325 and $17 944, respectively, for IVB; $114 095 and $92 653, respectively, for IVR; and $78 935 and $63 270, respectively, for IVA. From the societal perspective, the estimated lifetime costs per QALY in the facility setting were $52 754 for IVB, $128 242 for IVR, and $86 262 for IVA. The ICER of IVA compared with that of IVB was $153 633/QALY from the third-party facility setting and $152 992/QALY from the societal perspective. The use of IVB compared with IVR and IVA compared with IVR were cost-saving interventions (ICER, <0) regardless of the perspective or setting.

CONCLUSIONS

In the treatment of macular edema in CRVO, IVB yields the best cost utility among the 3 anti-VEGF agents modeled. Intravitreal aflibercept maintains acceptable lifetime cost per QALY while having a favorable cost utility compared with IVR.

Cost-Utility Analysis of VEGF Inhibitors for Treating Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration

PURPOSE

To perform 11- and 2-year health care sector (ophthalmic) and societal cost perspective reference case, cost-utility analyses comparing bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and aflibercept monotherapies for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (NVAMD).

DESIGN

Cost-utility analysis.

METHODS

The authors performed 11-year and 2-year ophthalmic and societal cost perspective, cost-utility analyses comparing bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and aflibercept monotherapies for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (NVAMD). We employed patient utilities, bilateral outcomes, 2018 U.S. dollars, vision-related mortality, a Medicare fee schedule, and CATT (Comparison of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treatments) study and VIEW (VEGF Trap-Eye: Investigation of Efficacy and Safety in Wet AMD) trial. Cochrane data were also used.

SETTING

Center for Value-Based Medicine. Patient/study population: patients with NVAMD.

INTERVENTION

Cost-utility analyses using published data. Data-modeled 10-year vision outcomes were modeled forward to year 11.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT

These included cost-utility ratios (CURs), costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. $100,00/QALY was considered the US cost-effectiveness upper limit.

RESULTS

Bevacizumab and ranibizumab each conferred an 11-year, 1.339 QALY gain versus observation. Aflibercept conferred a 1.380 QALY gain. Aflibercept conferred greater QALY gain for less cost than ranibizumab but was not cost-effective compared to bevacizumab ($1,151,451/QALY incremental CUR). The average ophthalmic cost perspective CUR for bevacizumab was $11,033/QALY, $79,600/QALY for ranibizumab, and $44,801/QALY for aflibercept. Eleven-year therapies saved a 1.0 year-of-life loss without treatment from the 11.0-year life expectancy. Early treatment was 138%-149% more cost-effective than late treatment. Two-year therapy prevented a 1-month-of-life loss, and revealed bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and aflibercept conferred 0.141, 0.141, and 0.164 QALY gains, respectively, with corresponding average CURs of $40,371/QALY, $335,726/QALY, and $168,006/QALY, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

From an ophthalmic (medical) cost perspective, bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and aflibercept NVAMD monotherapies were all cost-effective over 11 years, with bevacizumab 6.21× more cost-effective than ranibizumab and 3.06× more cost-effective than aflibercept. Two-year modeling revealed bevacizumab was cost-effective, whereas ranibizumab and aflibercept were not. Early treatment was critical for obtaining optimal vision and cost-effectiveness, as is long-term follow-up and adherence to treatment.

Health economic evaluation in ophthalmology

Health economic evaluation is the application of economic theories, tools and concepts to healthcare. In the setting of limited resources, increasing demand and a growing array of intervention options, economic evaluation provides a framework for measuring, valuing and comparing the costs and benefits of different healthcare interventions. This review provides an overview of the concepts and methods of economic evaluation, illustrated with examples in ophthalmology. Types of economic evaluation include cost-minimisation, cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, cost-utility and economic modelling. Topics including utility measures, the quality-adjusted lifeyear, discounting, perspective and timeframe are discussed. Health economic evaluation is important to understand the costs and value of interventions in ophthalmology and to inform health policy as well as guide clinical decision-making.

Cost-effectiveness Applications of Patient-reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in Spine Surgery

Because of the rising health care costs in the United States, there has been a focus on value-based care and improving the cost-effectiveness of surgical procedures. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can not only give physicians and health care providers immediate feedback on the well-being of the patients but also be used to assess health and determine outcomes for surgical research purposes. Recently, PROMs have become a prominent tool to assess the cost-effectiveness of spine surgery by calculating the improvement in quality-adjusted life years (QALY). The cost of a procedure per QALY gained is an essential metric to determine cost-effectiveness in universal health care systems. Common patient-reported outcome questionnaires to calculate QALY include the EuroQol-5 dimensions, the SF-36, and the SF-12. On the basis of the health-related quality of life outcomes, the cost-effectiveness of various spine surgeries can be determined, such as cervical fusions, lumbar fusions, microdiscectomies. As the United States attempts to reduce costs and emphasize value-based care, PROMs may serve a critical role in spine surgery moving forward. In addition, PROM-driven QALYs may be used to analyze novel spine surgical techniques for value-based improvements.

Health Economic and Safety Considerations for Artificial Intelligence Applications in Diabetic Retinopathy Screening

Systematic screening for diabetic retinopathy (DR) has been widely recommended for early detection in patients with diabetes to address preventable vision loss. However, substantial manpower and financial resources are required to deploy opportunistic screening and transition to systematic DR screening programs. The advent of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies may improve access and reduce the financial burden for DR screening while maintaining comparable or enhanced clinical effectiveness. To deploy an AI-based DR screening program in a real-world setting, it is imperative that health economic assessment (HEA) and patient safety analyses are conducted to guide appropriate allocation of resources and design safe, reliable systems. Few studies published to date include these considerations when integrating AI-based solutions into DR screening programs. In this article, we provide an overview of the current state-of-the-art of AI technology (focusing on deep learning systems), followed by an appraisal of existing literature on the applications of AI in ophthalmology. We also discuss practical considerations that drive the development of a successful DR screening program, such as the implications of false-positive or false-negative results and image gradeability. Finally, we examine different plausible methods for HEA and safety analyses that can be used to assess concerns regarding AI-based screening.

Cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab and aflibercept to treat diabetic macular edema from a US perspective: analysis of 2-year Protocol T data

Aims: Protocol T (NCT01627249) was a head-to-head study conducted by the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network that compared intravitreal aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab for the treatment of diabetic macular edema (DME). A cost-effectiveness analysis accompanying the 1-year data of Protocol T revealed that aflibercept was not cost-effective vs ranibizumab for all patients, but could have been cost-effective in certain patient sub-groups if the 1-year results were extrapolated out to 10 years. The present study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of US Food and Drug Administration-approved anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agents (ranibizumab, aflibercept) for treatment of DME using the 2-year data from Protocol T.Methods: Costs of aflibercept 2.0 mg or ranibizumab 0.3 mg, visual acuity (VA)-related medical costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were simulated for eight VA health states. Treatment, adverse event management, and VA-related healthcare resource costs (2016 US dollars) were based on Medicare reimbursement and published literature. VA-related health utilities were determined using a published algorithm. Patients were stratified by baseline VA: 20/40 or better; 20/50 or worse.Results: Total 2-year costs were higher, and QALYs similar, for aflibercept vs ranibizumab in the full cohort ($44,423 vs $34,529; 1.476 vs 1.466), 20/40 or better VA sub-group ($40,854 vs $31,897; 1.517 vs 1.519), and 20/50 or worse VA sub-group ($48,214 vs $37,246; 1.433 vs 1.412), respectively. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in the full cohort and 20/50 or worse VA sub-group were $986,159/QALY and $523,377/QALY, respectively. These decreased to $711,301 and $246,978 when analyses were extrapolated to 10 years.Limitations: Key potential limitations include the fact that VA was the only QALY parameter analyzed and the uncertainty surrounding the role of better- and worse-seeing eye VA in overall functional impairment.Conclusions: This analysis suggests that aflibercept is not cost-effective vs ranibizumab for patients with DME, regardless of baseline vision.

A Web-Based Communication Platform to Improve Home Care Services in Norway (DigiHelse): Pilot Study

Background

Home care service in Norway is struggling to meet the increasing demand for health care under restricted budget constraints, although one-fourth of municipal budgets are dedicated to health services. The integration of Web-based technology in at-home care is expected to enhance communication and patient involvement, increase efficiency and reduce cost. DigiHelse is a Web-based platform designed to reinforce home care service in Norway and is currently undergoing a development process to meet the predefined needs of the country’s municipalities. Some of the main features of the platform are digital messages between residents and the home care service, highlighting information on planned and completed visits, the opportunity to cancel visits, and notifications for completed visits.

Objective

This study aimed to test the usability and economic feasibility of adopting DigiHelse in four districts in Oslo by applying registry and behavioral data collected throughout a one-year pilot study. Early health technology assessment was used to estimate the potential future value of DigiHelse, including the predictive value of behavior data.

Methods

Outcome measures identified by stakeholder insights and scenario drafting in the project’s concept phase were used to assess potential socioeconomic benefits. Aggregated data were collected to assess changes in health consumption at baseline, and then 15 and 52 weeks after DigiHelse was implemented. The present value calculation was updated with data from four intervention groups and one control group. A quasi-experimental difference-in-difference design was applied to estimate the causal effect. Descriptive behavioral data from the digital platform was applied to assess the usability of the platform.

Results

Over the total study period (52 weeks), rates increased for all outcome estimates: the number of visits (rate ratio=1.04; P=.10), unnecessary trips (rate ratio=1.37; P=.26), and phone calls (rate ratio=1.24; P=.08). A significant gap was found between the estimated value of DigiHelse in the concept phase and after the one-year pilot. In the present pilot assessment, costs are expected to exceed potential savings by €67 million (US $75 million) over ten years, as compared to the corresponding concept estimates of a potential gain of €172.6 million (US $193.6 million). Interestingly, behavioral data from the digital platform revealed that only 3.55% (121/3405) of recipients actively used the platform after one year.

Conclusions

Behavioral data provides a valuable source for assessing usability. In this pilot study, the low adoption rate may, at least in part, explain the inability of DigiHelse to perform as expected. This study points to an early assessment of behavioral data as an opportunity to identify inefficiencies and direct digital development. For DigiHelse, insight into why the recipients in Oslo have not made greater use of the Web-based platform seems to be the next step in ensuring the right improvement measures for the home care service.

Five-Year Cost-effectiveness of Intravitreous Ranibizumab Therapy vs Panretinal Photocoagulation for Treating Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The DRCR Retina Network Protocol S randomized clinical trial suggested that the mean visual acuity of eyes with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) treated with ranibizumab is not worse at 5 years than that of eyes treated with panretinal photocoagulation (PRP). Moreover, the ranibizumab group had fewer new cases of diabetic macular edema (DME) with vision loss or vitrectomy but had 4 times the number of injections and 3 times the number of visits. Although 2-year cost-effectiveness results of Protocol S were previously identified, incorporating 5-year data from Protocol S could alter the longer-term cost-effectiveness of the treatment strategies from the perspective of the health care system.

Objective

To evaluate 5- and 10-year cost-effectiveness of therapy with ranibizumab, 0.5 mg, compared with PRP for treating PDR.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A preplanned secondary analysis of the Protocol S randomized clinical trial using efficacy, safety, and resource utilization data through 5 years of follow-up for 213 adults diagnosed with PDR and simulating results through 10 years.

Interventions

Intravitreous ranibizumab, 0.5 mg, at baseline and as frequently as every 4 weeks based on a structured retreatment protocol vs PRP at baseline for PDR; eyes in both groups could receive ranibizumab for concomitant DME with vision loss.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of ranibizumab therapy compared with PRP were evaluated for those with and without center-involved DME (CI-DME) and vision loss (Snellen equivalent, 20/32 or worse) at baseline.

Results

The study included 213 adults with a mean (SD) age of 53 (12) years, of whom 92 (43%) were women and 155 (73%) were white. The ICER of the ranibizumab group compared with PRP for patients without CI-DME at baseline was $582 268 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) at 5 years and $742 202/QALY at 10 years. For patients with baseline CI-DME, ICERs were $65 576/QALY at 5 years and $63 930/QALY at 10 years.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study suggests that during 5 to 10 years of treatment, ranibizumab, 0.5 mg, as given in the studied trial compared with PRP may be within the frequently cited range considered cost-effective in the United States for eyes presenting with PDR and vision-impairing CI-DME, but not for those with PDR but without vision-impairing CI-DME. Substantial reductions in anti-vascular endothelial growth factor cost may make the ranibizumab therapy cost-effective within this range even for patients without baseline CI-DME.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01489189.

Cost-effectiveness of Voretigene Neparvovec-rzyl vs Standard Care for RPE65-Mediated Inherited Retinal Disease

IMPORTANCE

Voretigene neparvovec-rzyl, the first gene therapy approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, was approved for the treatment for RPE65-mediated inherited retinal disease (IRD) in December 2017. This gene therapy is associated with high up-front costs and high efficacy, although of unknown duration, and its cost-effectiveness has not been assessed with RPE65 IRD-specific, longitudinal, patient-observation-level data.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of voretigene neparvovec-rzyl compared with standard care for RPE65-mediated inherited retinal disease.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this economic analysis, a health state transition model based on visual acuity and field with a lifetime horizon was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of voretigene neparvovec-rzyl. The model was populated with data from a clinical trial of voretigene neparvovec-rzyl to evaluate treatment outcome and a natural history study of RPE65-mediated IRD to examine disease progression. Direct costs were derived from the literature. Indirect costs, including educational attainment, productivity, caregiver burden, and governmental programs, were estimated using published literature and data analysis of public national surveys. A health utility vignette study specific to RPE65-mediated IRD was used for health utility inputs. The cost-effectiveness study described in this article was conducted from September 15, 2017, to August 23, 2018.

EXPOSURES

Bilateral voretigene neparvovec-rzyl therapy or standard care.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

RESULTS

The model population included 70 patients with RPE65-mediated IRD, with a mean age of 15 years; 42 of 70 patients (60%) were female. In the base case, voretigene neparvovec-rzyl compared with standard care was associated with lower total costs ($2.2 million vs $2.8 million) and higher quality-adjusted life-years (18.1 vs 8.6). Voretigene neparvovec-rzyl remains cost-effective if at least 8.8% of the long-term treatment effect continues after year 3 when including indirect costs and 43.3% when excluding indirect costs, assuming a cost threshold of $150 000 per quality-adjusted life-year.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Results of this study suggest that voretigene neparvovec-rzyl is cost-effective compared with standard care when using a lifetime horizon, excluding indirect costs, and using a threshold of $150 000 per quality-adjusted life-year.

Burden of visual impairment associated with eye diseases: exploratory survey of 298 Chinese patients

OBJECTIVES

To explore the economic burden, prevalence of catastrophic healthcare expenditure (CHE) and the quality of life (QoL) of Chinese patients with visual impairment (VI) associated with eye diseases.

DESIGN

A questionnaire survey from March to May 2016 by structured face-to-face interviews of patients with VI.

PARTICIPANTS

302 patients who were diagnosed with moderate VI or worse in both eyes (visual acuity <6/18) were included, and 298 patients (98.7%) who completed the survey questionnaires were eligible for the study.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The economic burden was estimated by calculating participants' direct costs covered in 2015 and the definition of CHE was out-of-pocket (OOP) costs exceeding 30% of annual household income. QoL was weighed by health utility value using time-trade-off valuation techniques.

RESULTS

Annual average direct costs per patient caused by VI were US$6988.6±US$10 834.3, and 70.3% were direct medical costs of which only 26.9% were reimbursable by medical insurance. 32.2% of households that suffered from CHE, in particular, were less wealthy patients with VI living in rural areas and without medical insurance. The health utility value was rated at 0.65 on average, and patients with VI aged 51-57, living alone and insured by commercial medical insurance had relatively less QoL.

CONCLUSION

Our study explored the economic burden and QoL of VI associated with patients with eye diseases in China, indicating a substantial economic burden and poor QoL. Preferential medical insurance policies should be designed in relation to people with VI to further reduce the health inequalities, avoid CHE and promote QoL.

Cost Analysis of Pneumatic Retinopexy versus Pars Plana Vitrectomy for Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment

PURPOSE

To perform a cost-utility analysis and comparison between pneumatic retinopexy (PR) and pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) repair.

DESIGN

A cost-utility analysis using decision analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

There were no participants.

METHODS

A decision analysis model was constructed based on results from the Pneumatic Retinopexy versus Vitrectomy for the Management of Primary Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment Outcomes Randomized Trial to calculate the costs, lifetime usefulness, and lifetime cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for the treatment of RRD with PR or PPV. Data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services were used to calculate the associated adjusted costs in facility and nonfacility practice settings.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Cost of intervention, utility gain over natural history, QALY gained, and cost per QALY.

RESULTS

The total imputed costs (all in 2019 United States dollars) for primary repair of RRD in facility and nonfacility settings were $4451 and $2456, respectively, in the PR group and $7108 and $4514, respectively, in the PPV group. The estimated lifetime QALYs gained were 5.9 and 5.4 in the PR and PPV groups, respectively. The cost per QALY for facility and nonfacility settings was $751 and $414, respectively, in the PR group and $1312 and $833, respectively, in the PPV group.

CONCLUSIONS

Cost-utility analysis of both PR and PPV demonstrated excellent results for both methods for RRD repair, with the metrics for PR somewhat more favorable independent of the practice settings (facility or nonfacility based).

Vision utilities in Italy and the United States: Comparison of time tradeoff vision utilities

Background/Aims:

To compare time tradeoff vision utilities from two developed Western countries to ascertain whether these vision-related, quality-of-life preferences are similar.

Methods:

Time tradeoff utilities were acquired from ophthalmology patient populations with ophthalmic pathologic conditions by personal interview in Italy and the United States using a reliable and previously validated, standardized questionnaire.

Results:

Data from 47 consecutive Italian participants and 325 consecutive American participants were compared. The populations were matched for gender, age, and ophthalmic pathologic conditions. The utilities for the various vision sub-cohort levels, characterized according to vision in the better-seeing eye for the Italian/American cohorts were as follows: (1) 20/20 sub-cohort, Italian/American mean utilities = 0.82/0.91 (p = 0.10); (2) 20/25–20/30 sub-cohort, Italian/American mean utilities = 0.79/0.86, (p = 0.05); (3) 2040–20/100 sub-cohort, Italian/American mean utilities = 0.76/0.74 (p = 0.70); and (4) 20/200 or less sub-cohort, Italian/American mean utilities = 0.66/0.58 (p = 0.58).

Conclusion:

Vision-related quality of life, as measured by time tradeoff utilities, was similar in Italian and American ophthalmic populations. This information is relevant when comparing quality of life and cost-utility analyses across international borders.

A systematic review on the quality, validity and usefulness of current cost-effectiveness studies for treatments of neovascular age-related macular degeneration

PURPOSE

Ophthalmologists increasingly depend on new drugs to advance their treatment options. These options are limited by restraints on reimbursements for new and expensive drugs. These restraints are put in place through health policy decisions based on cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA). Cost-effectiveness analyses need to be valid and of good quality to support correct decisions to create new treatment opportunities. In this study, we report the quality, validity and usefulness of CEAs for therapies for nAMD.

METHODS

A systematic review in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane was performed to include CEAs. Quality and validity assessment was based on current general quality criteria and on elements that are specific to the field of ophthalmology.

RESULTS

Forty-eight CEAs were included in the review. Forty-four CEAs did not meet four basic model quality and validity criteria specific to CEAs in the field of ophthalmology (both eyes analysed instead of one; a time horizon extending beyond 4 years; extrapolating VA and treatment intervals beyond trial data realistically; and including the costs of low-vision). Four CEAs aligned with the quality and validity criteria. In two of these CEAs bevacizumab as-needed (PRN) was more cost-effective than bevacizumab monthly; aflibercept (VIEW); or ranibizumab monthly or PRN. In two CEAs, ranibizumab (PRN or treat and extent) was dominant over aflibercept. In two other CEAs, aflibercept was either more cost-effective or dominant over ranibizumab monthly or PRN.

CONCLUSION

Two of the CEAs of sufficient quality and validity show that bevacizumab PRN is the most cost-effective treatment. Comparing ranibizumab and aflibercept, either treatment can be more cost-effective depending on the assumptions used for drug prices and treatment frequencies. The majority of the published CEAs are of insufficient quality and validity. They wrongly inform decision-makers at the cost of opportunities for ophthalmologists to treat patients. As such, they may negatively influence overall patient outcomes and societal costs. For future ophthalmic treatments, CEAs need to be improved and only published when they are of sufficient quality and validity.