Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2017
Cost-Utility Analysis of Extending Public Health Insurance Coverage to Include Diabetic Retinopathy Screening by Optometrists.
СтатьяПоддержка 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.
van Katwyk Sasha, Jin Ya-Ping, Trope Graham E, Buys Yvonne, Masucci Lisa, Wedge Richard, Flanagan John, Brent Michael H, El-Defrawy Sherif, Tu Hong Anh, Thavorn Kednapa
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is one of the leading causes of vision loss and blindness in Canada. Eye examinations play an important role in early detection. However, DR screening by optometrists is not always universally covered by public or private health insurance plans. This study assessed whether expanding public health coverage to include diabetic eye examinations for retinopathy by optometrists is cost-effective from the perspective of the health care system.
METHODS: We conducted a cost-utility analysis of extended coverage for diabetic eye examinations in Prince Edward Island to include examinations by optometrists, not currently publicly covered. We used a Markov chain to simulate disease burden based on eye examination rates and DR progression over a 30-year time horizon. Results were presented as an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. A series of one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS: Extending public health coverage to eye examinations by optometrists was associated with higher costs ($9,908,543.32) and improved QALYs (156,862.44), over 30 years, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1668.43/QALY gained. Sensitivity analysis showed that the most influential determinants of the results were the cost of optometric screening and selected utility scores. At the commonly used threshold of $50,000/QALY, the probability that the new policy was cost-effective was 99.99%.
CONCLUSIONS: Extending public health coverage to eye examinations by optometrists is cost-effective based on a commonly used threshold of $50,000/QALY. Findings from this study can inform the decision to expand public-insured optometric services for patients with diabetes.
METHODS: We conducted a cost-utility analysis of extended coverage for diabetic eye examinations in Prince Edward Island to include examinations by optometrists, not currently publicly covered. We used a Markov chain to simulate disease burden based on eye examination rates and DR progression over a 30-year time horizon. Results were presented as an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. A series of one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS: Extending public health coverage to eye examinations by optometrists was associated with higher costs ($9,908,543.32) and improved QALYs (156,862.44), over 30 years, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1668.43/QALY gained. Sensitivity analysis showed that the most influential determinants of the results were the cost of optometric screening and selected utility scores. At the commonly used threshold of $50,000/QALY, the probability that the new policy was cost-effective was 99.99%.
CONCLUSIONS: Extending public health coverage to eye examinations by optometrists is cost-effective based on a commonly used threshold of $50,000/QALY. Findings from this study can inform the decision to expand public-insured optometric services for patients with diabetes.