Yue Zhang, Weiling Bai, Ruyue Li, Yifan Du, Runzhou Sun, Tao Li, Hong Kang, Ziwei Yang, Jianjun Tang, Ningli Wang, Hanruo Liu
{"title":"中国糖尿病视网膜病变筛查的成本效用分析","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":"{\"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}","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}
Cost-Utility Analysis of Screening for Diabetic Retinopathy in China.
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.