Pediatrics · 2009
Cost-effectiveness of early treatment for retinopathy of prematurity.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kamholz Karen L, Cole Cynthia H, Gray James E, Zupancic John A F
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The Early Treatment for Retinopathy of Prematurity trial demonstrated that peripheral retinal ablation of eyes with high-risk prethreshold retinopathy of prematurity (early treatment) is associated with improved visual outcomes at 9 months' corrected gestational age compared with treatment at threshold disease (conventional management). However, early treatment increased the frequency of laser therapy, anesthesia with intubation, treatment-related systemic complications, and the need for repeat treatments.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of an early treatment strategy for retinopathy of prematurity compared with conventional management.
DESIGN/METHODS: We developed a stochastic decision analytic model to assess the incremental cost of early treatment per eye with severe visual impairment prevented. We derived resource-use and efficacy estimates from the Early Treatment for Retinopathy of Prematurity trial's published outcome data. We used a third-party payer perspective. Our primary analysis focused on outcomes from birth through 9 months' corrected gestational age. A secondary analysis used a lifetime horizon. Parameter uncertainty was quantified by using probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses.
RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness of early treatment was $14,200 per eye with severe visual impairment prevented. There was a 90% probability that the cost-effectiveness of early treatment would be less than $40,000 per eye with severe visual impairment prevented and a 0.5% probability that early treatment would be cost-saving (less costly and more effective). Limiting early treatment to more severely affected eyes (eyes with "type 1 retinopathy of prematurity" as defined by the Early Treatment for Retinopathy of Prematurity trial) had a cost-effectiveness of $6,200 per eye with severe visual impairment prevented. Analyses that considered long-term costs and outcomes found that early treatment was cost-saving.
CONCLUSIONS: Early treatment of retinopathy of prematurity is both efficacious and economically desirable. Because of the high lifetime costs of severe visual impairment, the early treatment strategy provides long-term cost savings.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of an early treatment strategy for retinopathy of prematurity compared with conventional management.
DESIGN/METHODS: We developed a stochastic decision analytic model to assess the incremental cost of early treatment per eye with severe visual impairment prevented. We derived resource-use and efficacy estimates from the Early Treatment for Retinopathy of Prematurity trial's published outcome data. We used a third-party payer perspective. Our primary analysis focused on outcomes from birth through 9 months' corrected gestational age. A secondary analysis used a lifetime horizon. Parameter uncertainty was quantified by using probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses.
RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness of early treatment was $14,200 per eye with severe visual impairment prevented. There was a 90% probability that the cost-effectiveness of early treatment would be less than $40,000 per eye with severe visual impairment prevented and a 0.5% probability that early treatment would be cost-saving (less costly and more effective). Limiting early treatment to more severely affected eyes (eyes with "type 1 retinopathy of prematurity" as defined by the Early Treatment for Retinopathy of Prematurity trial) had a cost-effectiveness of $6,200 per eye with severe visual impairment prevented. Analyses that considered long-term costs and outcomes found that early treatment was cost-saving.
CONCLUSIONS: Early treatment of retinopathy of prematurity is both efficacious and economically desirable. Because of the high lifetime costs of severe visual impairment, the early treatment strategy provides long-term cost savings.