Sean C Drummond, Brenton T Bicknell, Jack E Feist, Jason N Crosson, Richard M Feist
{"title":"术前全视网膜光凝治疗增殖性糖尿病视网膜病变的长期成本分析。","authors":"Sean C Drummond, Brenton T Bicknell, Jack E Feist, Jason N Crosson, Richard M Feist","doi":"10.1177/24741264251346822","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> To evaluate a treatment-naïve cohort of patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and assess the costs of panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) initially performed in the operating room or the clinic, incorporating the cost of the additional follow-up procedures required for each treatment group. <b>Methods:</b> A retrospective review was performed of patients with PDR initially treated with PRP in the operating room or the clinic. Cost data were derived from Current Procedural Terminology codes, and estimated mean facility costs were provided. For each cohort, negative binomial regressions were used to compare counts of subsequent interventions, and visual acuity (VA) outcomes and dollars per patient-treatment year were compared with paired <i>t</i> tests. <b>Results:</b> Eighty-two eyes of 53 patients met the inclusion criteria. The operating room cohort included 56 eyes of 38 patients, while the clinic cohort included 26 eyes of 16 patients. Patients had a minimum follow-up of more than 3 years. The operating room cohort required fewer subsequent PRP treatments (mean, 1.0 vs 2.1; <i>P</i> < .05) and surgeries (mean, 0.3 vs 0.7; <i>P</i> < .05) than the clinic cohort. The mean best-corrected VA (BCVA) after treatment was significantly better in the operating room cohort (0.30 ± 0.40 logMAR; Snellen equivalent, 20/39.9) than the clinic cohort (0.75 ± 0.81 logMAR; Snellen equivalent, 20/112.5) (<i>P</i> < .05). The cost per patient-treatment year was similar between the cohorts (operating room, $5,886.79; clinic, $5,657.50) (<i>P</i> = .75). <b>Conclusions:</b> PRP initially administered in the operating room was equal in cost to clinic administration and required fewer subsequent PRP sessions and surgical treatments. In addition, there was a significant improvement in the final BCVA.</p>","PeriodicalId":17919,"journal":{"name":"Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases","volume":" ","pages":"24741264251346822"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12165950/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Long-Term Cost Analysis of Initial Panretinal Photocoagulation for Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy Performed in the Operating Room vs the Clinic.\",\"authors\":\"Sean C Drummond, Brenton T Bicknell, Jack E Feist, Jason N Crosson, Richard M Feist\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/24741264251346822\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> To evaluate a treatment-naïve cohort of patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and assess the costs of panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) initially performed in the operating room or the clinic, incorporating the cost of the additional follow-up procedures required for each treatment group. <b>Methods:</b> A retrospective review was performed of patients with PDR initially treated with PRP in the operating room or the clinic. Cost data were derived from Current Procedural Terminology codes, and estimated mean facility costs were provided. For each cohort, negative binomial regressions were used to compare counts of subsequent interventions, and visual acuity (VA) outcomes and dollars per patient-treatment year were compared with paired <i>t</i> tests. <b>Results:</b> Eighty-two eyes of 53 patients met the inclusion criteria. The operating room cohort included 56 eyes of 38 patients, while the clinic cohort included 26 eyes of 16 patients. Patients had a minimum follow-up of more than 3 years. The operating room cohort required fewer subsequent PRP treatments (mean, 1.0 vs 2.1; <i>P</i> < .05) and surgeries (mean, 0.3 vs 0.7; <i>P</i> < .05) than the clinic cohort. The mean best-corrected VA (BCVA) after treatment was significantly better in the operating room cohort (0.30 ± 0.40 logMAR; Snellen equivalent, 20/39.9) than the clinic cohort (0.75 ± 0.81 logMAR; Snellen equivalent, 20/112.5) (<i>P</i> < .05). The cost per patient-treatment year was similar between the cohorts (operating room, $5,886.79; clinic, $5,657.50) (<i>P</i> = .75). <b>Conclusions:</b> PRP initially administered in the operating room was equal in cost to clinic administration and required fewer subsequent PRP sessions and surgical treatments. In addition, there was a significant improvement in the final BCVA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17919,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"24741264251346822\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12165950/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/24741264251346822\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/24741264251346822","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:评估treatment-naïve增生性糖尿病视网膜病变(PDR)患者队列,并评估最初在手术室或诊所进行的全视网膜光凝(PRP)的成本,包括每个治疗组所需的额外随访程序的成本。方法:回顾性分析术前在手术室或诊所接受PRP治疗的PDR患者。费用数据来自现行程序术语守则,并提供了估计的平均设施费用。对于每个队列,使用负二项回归来比较后续干预措施的计数,并使用配对t检验比较视力(VA)结果和每位患者治疗年的费用。结果:53例患者82只眼符合纳入标准。手术室队列包括38例患者的56只眼睛,而诊所队列包括16例患者的26只眼睛。患者至少随访3年以上。手术室队列需要较少的后续PRP治疗(平均1.0 vs 2.1;P < 0.05)和手术(平均0.3 vs 0.7;P < 0.05)。手术室组治疗后最佳校正VA (BCVA)均值显著高于对照组(0.30±0.40 logMAR;Snellen当量,20/39.9)高于临床队列(0.75±0.81 logMAR;Snellen当量为20/112.5)(P < 0.05)。每个患者治疗年的费用在队列之间相似(手术室,5,886.79美元;诊所,$5,657.50)(P = 0.75)。结论:在手术室初始实施PRP的成本与临床实施相同,并且需要较少的后续PRP疗程和手术治疗。此外,最终BCVA也有显著改善。
Long-Term Cost Analysis of Initial Panretinal Photocoagulation for Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy Performed in the Operating Room vs the Clinic.
Purpose: To evaluate a treatment-naïve cohort of patients with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and assess the costs of panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) initially performed in the operating room or the clinic, incorporating the cost of the additional follow-up procedures required for each treatment group. Methods: A retrospective review was performed of patients with PDR initially treated with PRP in the operating room or the clinic. Cost data were derived from Current Procedural Terminology codes, and estimated mean facility costs were provided. For each cohort, negative binomial regressions were used to compare counts of subsequent interventions, and visual acuity (VA) outcomes and dollars per patient-treatment year were compared with paired t tests. Results: Eighty-two eyes of 53 patients met the inclusion criteria. The operating room cohort included 56 eyes of 38 patients, while the clinic cohort included 26 eyes of 16 patients. Patients had a minimum follow-up of more than 3 years. The operating room cohort required fewer subsequent PRP treatments (mean, 1.0 vs 2.1; P < .05) and surgeries (mean, 0.3 vs 0.7; P < .05) than the clinic cohort. The mean best-corrected VA (BCVA) after treatment was significantly better in the operating room cohort (0.30 ± 0.40 logMAR; Snellen equivalent, 20/39.9) than the clinic cohort (0.75 ± 0.81 logMAR; Snellen equivalent, 20/112.5) (P < .05). The cost per patient-treatment year was similar between the cohorts (operating room, $5,886.79; clinic, $5,657.50) (P = .75). Conclusions: PRP initially administered in the operating room was equal in cost to clinic administration and required fewer subsequent PRP sessions and surgical treatments. In addition, there was a significant improvement in the final BCVA.