Literature DB >> 6422576

Glaucoma screening. A cost-effectiveness analysis.

L K Gottlieb, B Schwartz, S G Pauker.   

Abstract

We designed an intricate model of the process of glaucoma screening, diagnosis, and treatment in order to evaluate the medical care costs of such efforts in relation to the benefits in terms of quality-adjusted years of vision saved, utilizing the economic principles of cost-effectiveness analysis. Although a relatively limited data base and numerous assumptions concerning the accuracy of diagnostic tests, the natural history of ocular hypertension and glaucoma, and the effectiveness of available treatment modalities, limit our ability to draw definitive conclusions concerning the cost-effectiveness of various glaucoma screening options, our analysis indicates that glaucoma screening is probably cost-effective when targeted at certain subgroups of the population. Our analysis suggests that changes in several aspects of existing screening policies may be appropriate if cost-effectiveness is to be used as one of the criteria for the efficient allocation of resources to and within screening programs. Specifically, combinations of screening tests and screening targeted at high risk populations such as blacks, diabetics, and relatives of glaucoma patients are probably more cost-effective than screening of the general population with a single test. In younger populations, the importance of detecting ocular hypertension argues for the use of tonometry. Ophthalmoscopy may be more cost-effective in older age groups in whom the higher prevalence of glaucoma outweighs the need for identifying ocular hypertensives. In the very elderly, automated perimetry becomes cost-effective since the detection of established field loss will have greater yield. In addition, it is evident that diversion of resources away from actual screening efforts and towards efforts aimed at improving follow-up and compliance would be an additional cost-effective strategy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1983        PMID: 6422576     DOI: 10.1016/0039-6257(83)90098-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surv Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0039-6257            Impact factor:   6.048


  8 in total

Review 1.  The World Health Organization's programme for the prevention of blindness.

Authors:  B Thylefors
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 2.031

Review 2.  Screening for glaucoma. Why is the disease underdetected?

Authors:  M W Tuck; R P Crick
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 3.923

3.  Screening for glaucoma.

Authors:  R A Hitchings
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1986-02-22

4.  Physician recognition of ophthalmoscopic signs of open-angle glaucoma: effect of an educational program.

Authors:  K L Margolis; B E Money; L A Kopietz; E C Rich
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1989 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Periodic health examination, 1995 update: 3. Screening for visual problems among elderly patients. Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination.

Authors: 
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1995-04-15       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 6.  The economic implications of glaucoma: a literature review.

Authors:  Jordana K Schmier; Michael T Halpern; Mechelle L Jones
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Is screening for glaucoma necessary? A policy guide and analysis.

Authors:  Seyed-Farzad Mohammadi; Ghasem Saeedi-Anari; Cyrus Alinia; Elham Ashrafi; Ramin Daneshvar; Alfred Sommer
Journal:  J Ophthalmic Vis Res       Date:  2014-01

8.  The Evonik-Mainz-Eye-Care-Study (EMECS): design and execution of the screening investigation.

Authors:  Lorenz Barleon; Jochen Wahl; Peter Morfeld; Claudia Deters; Andrea Lichtmeβ; Sibylle Haas-Brähler; Uta Müller; Rolf Breitstadt; Norbert Pfeiffer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-06-10       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.