Connor J Alder, Francis Mutangana, Victoria Phillips, Edmund R Becker, Neil S Fleming, Sherwin J Isenberg, Scott R Lambert, Tahvi D Frank
{"title":"卢旺达早产儿视网膜病变治疗的成本效益。","authors":"Connor J Alder, Francis Mutangana, Victoria Phillips, Edmund R Becker, Neil S Fleming, Sherwin J Isenberg, Scott R Lambert, Tahvi D Frank","doi":"10.1080/09286586.2024.2372803","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>With the expansion of neonatal care in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), an increasing number of premature babies are at risk to develop retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). Previous studies have quantified the cost-effectiveness of addressing ROP in middle-income countries, but few have focused on SSA. This study estimates the cost of a national program for ROP screening and anti-VEGF injection treatment in Rwanda compared to the status quo.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medical cost data were collected from King Faisal Hospital in Rwanda (July 2022). Societal burden of vision loss included lost productivity and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Published data on epidemiology and natural history of ROP were used to estimate burden and sequelae of ROP in Rwanda. Cost of a national program for screening and treating a one-year birth cohort was compared to the status quo using a decision analysis model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cost of ROP screening and treatment was $738 per infant. The estimated equipment cost necessary for the startup of a national program was $58,667. We projected that a national program could avert 257 cases of blindness in the cohort and increase QALYs compared to the status quo. Screening and treatment for ROP would save an estimated $270,000 for the birth cohort from reductions in lost productivity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The cost of screening and anti-VEGF treatment for ROP is substantially less than the indirect cost of vision loss due to ROP. Allocating additional funding towards expansion of ROP screening and treatment is cost-saving from a societal perspective compared to current practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":19607,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-Effectiveness of Addressing Retinopathy of Prematurity in Rwanda.\",\"authors\":\"Connor J Alder, Francis Mutangana, Victoria Phillips, Edmund R Becker, Neil S Fleming, Sherwin J Isenberg, Scott R Lambert, Tahvi D Frank\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09286586.2024.2372803\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>With the expansion of neonatal care in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), an increasing number of premature babies are at risk to develop retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). Previous studies have quantified the cost-effectiveness of addressing ROP in middle-income countries, but few have focused on SSA. This study estimates the cost of a national program for ROP screening and anti-VEGF injection treatment in Rwanda compared to the status quo.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medical cost data were collected from King Faisal Hospital in Rwanda (July 2022). Societal burden of vision loss included lost productivity and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Published data on epidemiology and natural history of ROP were used to estimate burden and sequelae of ROP in Rwanda. Cost of a national program for screening and treating a one-year birth cohort was compared to the status quo using a decision analysis model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cost of ROP screening and treatment was $738 per infant. The estimated equipment cost necessary for the startup of a national program was $58,667. We projected that a national program could avert 257 cases of blindness in the cohort and increase QALYs compared to the status quo. Screening and treatment for ROP would save an estimated $270,000 for the birth cohort from reductions in lost productivity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The cost of screening and anti-VEGF treatment for ROP is substantially less than the indirect cost of vision loss due to ROP. Allocating additional funding towards expansion of ROP screening and treatment is cost-saving from a societal perspective compared to current practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19607,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmic epidemiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmic epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09286586.2024.2372803\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09286586.2024.2372803","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Cost-Effectiveness of Addressing Retinopathy of Prematurity in Rwanda.
Purpose: With the expansion of neonatal care in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), an increasing number of premature babies are at risk to develop retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). Previous studies have quantified the cost-effectiveness of addressing ROP in middle-income countries, but few have focused on SSA. This study estimates the cost of a national program for ROP screening and anti-VEGF injection treatment in Rwanda compared to the status quo.
Methods: Medical cost data were collected from King Faisal Hospital in Rwanda (July 2022). Societal burden of vision loss included lost productivity and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Published data on epidemiology and natural history of ROP were used to estimate burden and sequelae of ROP in Rwanda. Cost of a national program for screening and treating a one-year birth cohort was compared to the status quo using a decision analysis model.
Results: Cost of ROP screening and treatment was $738 per infant. The estimated equipment cost necessary for the startup of a national program was $58,667. We projected that a national program could avert 257 cases of blindness in the cohort and increase QALYs compared to the status quo. Screening and treatment for ROP would save an estimated $270,000 for the birth cohort from reductions in lost productivity.
Conclusion: The cost of screening and anti-VEGF treatment for ROP is substantially less than the indirect cost of vision loss due to ROP. Allocating additional funding towards expansion of ROP screening and treatment is cost-saving from a societal perspective compared to current practice.
期刊介绍:
Ophthalmic Epidemiology is dedicated to the publication of original research into eye and vision health in the fields of epidemiology, public health and the prevention of blindness. Ophthalmic Epidemiology publishes editorials, original research reports, systematic reviews and meta-analysis articles, brief communications and letters to the editor on all subjects related to ophthalmic epidemiology. A broad range of topics is suitable, such as: evaluating the risk of ocular diseases, general and specific study designs, screening program implementation and evaluation, eye health care access, delivery and outcomes, therapeutic efficacy or effectiveness, disease prognosis and quality of life, cost-benefit analysis, biostatistical theory and risk factor analysis. We are looking to expand our engagement with reports of international interest, including those regarding problems affecting developing countries, although reports from all over the world potentially are suitable. Clinical case reports, small case series (not enough for a cohort analysis) articles and animal research reports are not appropriate for this journal.