Is primary trabeculectomy cost-effective for patients with advanced primary open angle glaucoma? Results from the Treatment of Advanced Glaucoma Study economic model.

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Hosein Shabaninejad, Tara Homer, Ashleigh Kernohan, Anthony J King, Jennifer Burr, Augusto Azuara-Blanco, Luke Vale
{"title":"Is primary trabeculectomy cost-effective for patients with advanced primary open angle glaucoma? Results from the Treatment of Advanced Glaucoma Study economic model.","authors":"Hosein Shabaninejad, Tara Homer, Ashleigh Kernohan, Anthony J King, Jennifer Burr, Augusto Azuara-Blanco, Luke Vale","doi":"10.1136/bjo-2023-323390","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aims: </strong>Advanced primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) is a lifelong condition. The aim of this study is to compare medical treatment against trabeculectomy for patients presenting with advanced POAG using an economic evaluation decision model.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A Markov model was used to compare the two treatments, medical treatment versus trabeculectomy for the management of advanced POAG, in terms of costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The uncertainty surrounding the model findings was assessed using probabilistic sensitivity analysis and deterministic analysis. Data for the model came from Treatment of Advanced Glaucoma Study supplemented with data from the literature. The main outcomes of the model presented in terms of Incremental costs and QALYs based on responses to the EQ-5D-5L, Health Utilities Index-3 and a Glaucoma Utility Index.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the base-case analysis (lifetime horizon and EQ-5D-5L measure), participants receiving trabeculectomy had on average, an additional cost of £2687, an additional 0.28 QALYs and an incremental cost per QALY of £9679 compared with medical treatment. There was a 73% likelihood of trabeculectomy being considered cost-effective when society was willing to pay £20 000 for a QALY. Over shorter time horizons, the incremental cost per QALY gained from trabeculectomy compared with medical treatment was higher (47 663) for a 2-year time horizon. Our results are robust to changes in the key assumptions and input parameters values.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In patients presenting with advanced POAG, trabeculectomy has a higher probability of being cost-effective over a patient's lifetime compared with medical treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":9313,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11347270/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo-2023-323390","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/aims: Advanced primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) is a lifelong condition. The aim of this study is to compare medical treatment against trabeculectomy for patients presenting with advanced POAG using an economic evaluation decision model.

Methods: A Markov model was used to compare the two treatments, medical treatment versus trabeculectomy for the management of advanced POAG, in terms of costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The uncertainty surrounding the model findings was assessed using probabilistic sensitivity analysis and deterministic analysis. Data for the model came from Treatment of Advanced Glaucoma Study supplemented with data from the literature. The main outcomes of the model presented in terms of Incremental costs and QALYs based on responses to the EQ-5D-5L, Health Utilities Index-3 and a Glaucoma Utility Index.

Results: In the base-case analysis (lifetime horizon and EQ-5D-5L measure), participants receiving trabeculectomy had on average, an additional cost of £2687, an additional 0.28 QALYs and an incremental cost per QALY of £9679 compared with medical treatment. There was a 73% likelihood of trabeculectomy being considered cost-effective when society was willing to pay £20 000 for a QALY. Over shorter time horizons, the incremental cost per QALY gained from trabeculectomy compared with medical treatment was higher (47 663) for a 2-year time horizon. Our results are robust to changes in the key assumptions and input parameters values.

Conclusion: In patients presenting with advanced POAG, trabeculectomy has a higher probability of being cost-effective over a patient's lifetime compared with medical treatment.

对晚期原发性开角型青光眼患者进行小梁切除术是否具有成本效益?晚期青光眼治疗研究经济模型的结果。
背景/目的:晚期原发性开角型青光眼(POAG)是一种终身性疾病。本研究旨在使用经济评估决策模型,比较晚期原发性开角型青光眼患者的药物治疗和小梁切除术:方法:采用马尔可夫模型,从成本和质量调整生命年(QALYs)的角度对两种治疗方法(药物治疗和小梁切除术)进行比较,以治疗晚期 POAG。利用概率敏感性分析和确定性分析对模型结论的不确定性进行了评估。模型数据来自晚期青光眼治疗研究,并辅以文献数据。根据对 EQ-5D-5L、健康效用指数-3 和青光眼效用指数的反应,模型的主要结果显示为增量成本和 QALY:在基础案例分析(终生范围和 EQ-5D-5L 测量)中,与药物治疗相比,接受小梁切除术的参与者平均增加成本 2687 英镑,增加 0.28 个 QALY,每个 QALY 的增量成本为 9679 英镑。当社会愿意为一个 QALY 支付 20,000 英镑时,小梁切除术被认为具有成本效益的可能性为 73%。在较短的时间跨度内,与药物治疗相比,小梁切除术每获得一个 QALY 的增量成本在 2 年的时间跨度内更高(47 663)。我们的结果对关键假设和输入参数值的变化是稳健的:结论:对于晚期 POAG 患者,与药物治疗相比,小梁切除术在患者一生中具有较高成本效益的可能性更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
2.40%
发文量
213
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Ophthalmology (BJO) is an international peer-reviewed journal for ophthalmologists and visual science specialists. BJO publishes clinical investigations, clinical observations, and clinically relevant laboratory investigations related to ophthalmology. It also provides major reviews and also publishes manuscripts covering regional issues in a global context.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信