Literature DB >> 9145411

The cost-effectiveness of various modes of screening for primary open angle glaucoma.

M W Tuck1, R P Crick.   

Abstract

Various modes of screening for glaucoma were defined in terms of different combinations of the three main tests (ophthalmoscopy (O), tonometry (T), and perimetry (P)), together with associated referral criteria. The number of referrals and true positives generated by each mode was estimated for a model population, which was distributed with respect to age, intraocular pressure (IOP), optic disc condition, visual field defects, family history of glaucoma, and myopic status, as indicated by epidemiological studies. The costs of primary examination, and also of the secondary examination of referrals, were estimated for each mode, thus enabling the total cost per true positive to be calculated (in Pound sterling at 1995 UK prices, subsequently converted to US dollars at Pound 1.00 = $1.55.) The modes using O and T routinely, with P either routinely or selectively on all glaucoma high-risk groups, were found to provide the best balance between sensitivity (> or = 80%) and cost per true positive. The latter was around $850 when the cost of ophthalmoscopy could be shared as part of a general eye examination. The calculations assumed a 0.6% prevalence of previously undetected glaucomas in the community: with higher prevalences, costs per true positive would be lower. Screening the 40-59 years age group was found to be about as economic as for older people, when life expectancy was taken into account. It was concluded that glaucoma screening of people over age 40 years could be justifiable, provided that it is worth more than about $850 to detect a new case. Whilst based on UK values, the analysis could be applied to different primary health care settings in other countries.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9145411     DOI: 10.3109/09286589709058056

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmic Epidemiol        ISSN: 0928-6586            Impact factor:   1.648


  14 in total

Review 1.  Understanding cost effectiveness: a detailed review.

Authors:  A F Smith; G C Brown
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 4.638

Review 2.  Chronic open-angle glaucoma. Review for primary care physicians.

Authors:  Feisal A Adatia; Karim F Damji
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.275

Review 3.  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

Review 4.  [Assessment of risk factors for the occurrence of open angle glaucoma : Guidelines of the German Ophthalmological Society and the Professional Association of Ophthalmologists in Germany].

Authors: 
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2021-01       Impact factor: 1.059

Review 5.  The economic burden of glaucoma and ocular hypertension: implications for patient management: a review.

Authors:  Jean-François Rouland; Gilles Berdeaux; Antoine Lafuma
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 3.923

6.  Frequency doubling perimetry and the detection of eye disease in the community.

Authors:  G A Cioffi; S Mansberger; P Spry; C Johnson; E M Van Buskirk
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  2000

7.  Severity of Visual Field Loss at First Presentation to Glaucoma Clinics in England and Tanzania.

Authors:  Pete R Jones; Heiko Philippin; William U Makupa; Matthew J Burton; David P Crabb
Journal:  Ophthalmic Epidemiol       Date:  2019-09-13       Impact factor: 1.648

Review 8.  Glaucoma: diagnosis and management.

Authors:  D A Infeld; J G O'Shea
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 2.401

9.  Comparison of intraocular pressure measurements with the portable PT100 noncontact tonometer and goldmann applanation tonometry.

Authors:  Sarwat Salim; Daniel J Linn; James R Echols; Peter A Netland
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-06-02

10.  The papilla as screening parameter for early diagnosis of glaucoma.

Authors:  Georg Michelson; Simone Wärntges; Joachim Hornegger; Berthold Lausen
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2008-08-25       Impact factor: 5.594

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.