Yue Zhang, Weiling Bai, Ruyue Li, Yifan Du, Runzhou Sun, Tao Li, Hong Kang, Ziwei Yang, Jianjun Tang, Ningli Wang, Hanruo Liu
{"title":"Cost-Utility Analysis of Screening for Diabetic Retinopathy in China.","authors":"Yue Zhang, Weiling Bai, Ruyue Li, Yifan Du, Runzhou Sun, Tao Li, Hong Kang, Ziwei Yang, Jianjun Tang, Ningli Wang, Hanruo Liu","doi":"10.34133/2022/9832185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Background</i>. Diabetic retinopathy (DR) has been primarily indicated to cause vision impairment and blindness, while no studies have focused on the cost-utility of telemedicine-based and community screening programs for DR in China, especially in rural and urban areas, respectively.<i>Methods</i>. We developed a Markov model to calculate the cost-utility of screening programs for DR in DM patients in rural and urban settings from the societal perspective. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was calculated for the assessment.<i>Results</i>. In the rural setting, the community screening program obtained 1 QALY with a cost of $4179 (95% CI 3859 to 5343), and the telemedicine screening program had an ICUR of $2323 (95% CI 1023 to 3903) compared with no screening, both of which satisfied the criterion of a significantly cost-effective health intervention. Likewise, community screening programs in urban areas generated an ICUR of $3812 (95% CI 2906 to 4167) per QALY gained, with telemedicine screening at an ICUR of $2437 (95% CI 1242 to 3520) compared with no screening, and both were also cost-effective. By further comparison, compared to community screening programs, telemedicine screening yielded an ICUR of 1212 (95% CI 896 to 1590) per incremental QALY gained in rural setting and 1141 (95% CI 859 to 1403) in urban setting, which both meet the criterion for a significantly cost-effective health intervention.<i>Conclusions</i>. Both telemedicine and community screening for DR in rural and urban settings were cost-effective in China, and telemedicine screening programs were more cost-effective.</p>","PeriodicalId":73207,"journal":{"name":"Health data science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10904067/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health data science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34133/2022/9832185","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background. Diabetic retinopathy (DR) has been primarily indicated to cause vision impairment and blindness, while no studies have focused on the cost-utility of telemedicine-based and community screening programs for DR in China, especially in rural and urban areas, respectively.Methods. We developed a Markov model to calculate the cost-utility of screening programs for DR in DM patients in rural and urban settings from the societal perspective. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was calculated for the assessment.Results. In the rural setting, the community screening program obtained 1 QALY with a cost of $4179 (95% CI 3859 to 5343), and the telemedicine screening program had an ICUR of $2323 (95% CI 1023 to 3903) compared with no screening, both of which satisfied the criterion of a significantly cost-effective health intervention. Likewise, community screening programs in urban areas generated an ICUR of $3812 (95% CI 2906 to 4167) per QALY gained, with telemedicine screening at an ICUR of $2437 (95% CI 1242 to 3520) compared with no screening, and both were also cost-effective. By further comparison, compared to community screening programs, telemedicine screening yielded an ICUR of 1212 (95% CI 896 to 1590) per incremental QALY gained in rural setting and 1141 (95% CI 859 to 1403) in urban setting, which both meet the criterion for a significantly cost-effective health intervention.Conclusions. Both telemedicine and community screening for DR in rural and urban settings were cost-effective in China, and telemedicine screening programs were more cost-effective.