PURPOSE: The purpose of the study is to assess the hospital charges associated with the treatment of endophthalmitis using a sample of patients from the Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study (EVS). METHODS: The Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study was a multicenter, randomized clinical trial with a two-by-two factorial design to compare immediate pars plana vitrectomy to tap-biopsy and to compare the use of systemic antibiotics (intravenous) to no intravenous antibiotics in the management of postoperative endophthalmitis. Hospital charge data were collected retrospectively from 129 patients from the 4 clinical centers participating in this ancillary study. This represents 31% of the total Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study population. An analysis of variance was used to compare hospital charges across center and treatment. A charge-effectiveness analysis compared measures the effectiveness across treatment groups. The annual savings of hospital charges in the United States was estimated for a range of annual incidence rates of endophthalmitis. RESULTS: The use of intravenous antibiotics significantly increased hospital charges. Patients undergoingvitrectomy had significantly higher hospital charges than did patients undergoing tap-biopsy. The most charge-effective treatment for patients presenting with light perception only vision was immediate vitrectomy, whereas the most charge-effective treatment for patients presenting with better vision was tap-biopsy. Factors other than treatment independently associated with hospital charges were female sex, history of diabetes, symptom of red eye, and baseline vision of light perception only. CONCLUSIONS: Assuming the results of the Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study were used as a guide for the treatment of endophthalmitis, the estimated annual nationwide reduction of hospital charges would be between $7.6 million and $40.0 million.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The purpose of the study is to assess the hospital charges associated with the treatment of endophthalmitis using a sample of patients from the Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study (EVS). METHODS: The Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study was a multicenter, randomized clinical trial with a two-by-two factorial design to compare immediate pars plana vitrectomy to tap-biopsy and to compare the use of systemic antibiotics (intravenous) to no intravenous antibiotics in the management of postoperative endophthalmitis. Hospital charge data were collected retrospectively from 129 patients from the 4 clinical centers participating in this ancillary study. This represents 31% of the total Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study population. An analysis of variance was used to compare hospital charges across center and treatment. A charge-effectiveness analysis compared measures the effectiveness across treatment groups. The annual savings of hospital charges in the United States was estimated for a range of annual incidence rates of endophthalmitis. RESULTS: The use of intravenous antibiotics significantly increased hospital charges. Patients undergoing vitrectomy had significantly higher hospital charges than did patients undergoing tap-biopsy. The most charge-effective treatment for patients presenting with light perception only vision was immediate vitrectomy, whereas the most charge-effective treatment for patients presenting with better vision was tap-biopsy. Factors other than treatment independently associated with hospital charges were female sex, history of diabetes, symptom of red eye, and baseline vision of light perception only. CONCLUSIONS: Assuming the results of the Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study were used as a guide for the treatment of endophthalmitis, the estimated annual nationwide reduction of hospital charges would be between $7.6 million and $40.0 million.
Authors: Elena Nicod; Timothy L Jackson; Federico Grimaccia; Aris Angelis; Marc Costen; Richard Haynes; Edward Hughes; Edward Pringle; Hadi Zambarakji; Panos Kanavos Journal: Eur J Health Econ Date: 2015-11-24