Cost-Utility Analysis of Screening for Diabetic Retinopathy in China.

Health data science Pub Date : 2022-03-12 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.34133/2022/9832185
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.

中国糖尿病视网膜病变筛查的成本效用分析
背景糖尿病视网膜病变(DR)主要被认为会导致视力障碍和失明,而在中国,尤其是在农村和城市地区,没有研究关注基于远程医疗和社区DR筛查项目的成本效用。方法。我们开发了一个马尔可夫模型,从社会角度计算农村和城市糖尿病患者DR筛查计划的成本效用。为评估计算了增量成本效用比(ICUR)。后果在农村环境中,社区筛查项目获得了1个QALY,费用为4179美元(95%置信区间3859至5343),远程医疗筛查项目的ICUR为2323美元(95%可信区间1023至3903),而没有筛查,这两项都满足了成本效益显著的健康干预标准。同样,城市地区的社区筛查项目每增加一个QALY的ICUR为3812美元(95%置信区间2906至4167),远程医疗筛查的ICUR与无筛查相比为2437美元(95%可信区间1242至3520),两者都具有成本效益。通过进一步比较,与社区筛查项目相比,远程医疗筛查在农村环境中每增加一次QALY,ICUR为1212(95%CI 896至1590),在城市环境中为1141(95%CI 859至1403),这两项指标都符合成本效益显著的健康干预标准。结论。在中国,远程医疗和社区DR筛查在农村和城市环境中都具有成本效益,远程医疗筛查项目更具成本效益。
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
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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