Cost-effectiveness analysis in glaucoma: What drives utility? Results from a pilot study in Sweden

Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica

Volumn 84, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 363-371

  Kobelt, Gisela ^a,g   Jonsson, Björn ^b   Bergström, Anders ^c   Chen, Enping ^d   Lindén, Christina ^e   Alm, Albert ^f  

^a European Health Economics ^*  (France)

^b UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^c LUND UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^d ST ERIK S EYE HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^e UMEÅ UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^f UPPSALA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^g European Health Economics   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Disease severity; Glaucoma; Quality of life; Utility; Visual acuity

Indexed keywords

ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR STIMULATING AGENT; ALPHA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT; CARBONATE DEHYDRATASE INHIBITOR; PROSTAGLANDIN DERIVATIVE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CATARACT EXTRACTION; COMORBIDITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; INTRAOCULAR HYPERTENSION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIPLE REGRESSION; OPEN ANGLE GLAUCOMA; PILOT STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; SWEDEN; TRABECULECTOMY; UTILIZATION REVIEW; VISION; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL FIELD DEFECT; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA, OPEN-ANGLE; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OCULAR HYPERTENSION; PILOT PROJECTS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; SWEDEN; VISION DISORDERS; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 33646784662     PISSN: 13953907     EISSN: 16000420     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0420.2005.00621.x     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Althin R & Lundström M (2004): Utilities in Glaucoma. Presented at the European Glaucoma Society Meeting, Florence, Italy, 2004.
2. Bentkover J (1984): Use of Beta-Blockers in tAe Treatment of Glaucoma: a Cost-Benefit Study. Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association Report No. 8. Washington DC: Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association.
3. Brown J (1999): Vision and quality of life. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 97: 473-511.
4. Brown M, Brown J, Sharma S & Busbee B (2003): Quality of life associated with visual loss. A time trade-off utility analysis comparison with medical health states. Ophthalmology 110: 1076-1081.
5. Brown M, Brown J, Sharma S & Shah G (1999): Utility values and diabetic retinopathy. Am J Ophthalmol 128: 324-330.
6. Brown J, Sharma S, Brown M & Shah G (2000): Utility values and age-related macular degeneration. Arch Ophthalmol 118: 47-51.
7. Burstrom K, Johannesson M & Diderichsen F (2001): Swedish population health-related quality of life results using the EQ-5D. Quality Life Res 10: 621-635.
8. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P & Williams A (1995): A Social Tariff for Euroqol: Results from a UK General Population Survey. York: Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
9. Drummond FM, O'Brien B, Stoddard L & Torrance GW (1997): Methods for the Economics Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1-305.
10. EuroQol Group (1990): EuroQol - a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 96: 199-208.
11. Hawkins A, Szlyk J, Alexander K & Wilensky J (2003): Comparison of contrast sensitivity, visual acuity and Humphrey visual field testing in patients with glaucoma. J Glaucoma 12: 134-138.
12. Hodapp E, Parrish R & Anderson D (1993): Clinical Decisions in Glaucoma. St. Louis: Mosby.
13. Jampel J, Schwartz A, Pollack I, Abrams D, Weiss H & Miller R (2002): Glaucoma patients' assessment of their visual function and quality of life. J Glaucoma 11: 154-165.
14. Katz J, Sommer A, Gaasterland D & Anderson D (1991): Comparison of analytic algorithms for detecting glaucomatous visual field loss. Arch Ophthalmol 109: 1684-1689.
15. Kobelt G (1999): Differences in international treatment patterns and costs. In: Jönsson B & Kneglstein G (eds). Primary Open-angle Glaucoma. Oxford: Isis Medical Media; 1-174.
16. Kobelt G (2002a): Health economics, economic eAaluation and glaucoma: a review. J Glaucoma 11: 531-539.
17. Kobelt G (2002b): Health Economics: Introdu-ction to Economic Evaluation. London: Office of Health Economics; 1-131.
18. Kobelt G & Jönsson L (1999): Modelling cost of patient management with new topical treatments for glaucoma. Results for France and the UK. Int J Technol Assessment Health Care 15: 207-219.
19. Kobelt G, Jönsson L, Gerdtham U & Krieglstein G (1998): Direct cost of glaucoma management following initiation of medical therapy. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 236: 811-821.
20. Kobelt G, Lundström M & Stenevi U (2002): Cost-effectiveness of cataract surgery. A method to assess cost-effectiveness using registry data. J Cataract Refract Surg 28: 1742-1749.
21. Lundberg L, Johannesson M, Isacson D & Borgquist L (1999): Health-state utilities in a general population in relation to age, gender and socioeconomic factors. Eur J Public Health 9: 211-217.
22. Lundstrom M, Roos P, Jensen S & Fregell G (1997): Catquest questionnaire for use in cataract surgery care: Description, validity and reliability. J Cataract Refract Surg 23: 1226-1236.
23. Rocchi A & Tingey D (1997): Economic evaluation of dorzolamide versus pilocarpine for primary open-angle glaucoma. Can J Ophthalmol 32: 414-418.
24. Rouland J & LePen C (2002): Naturalistic, prospective study of glaucoma and ocular hypertension treatment in France: Strategies, clinical outcomes, and costs at 1 year. Eur J Ophthalmol 13: 5-20.
25. Sharma S, Brown M, Hollands H & Shah G (2001): The cost-effectiveness of photodynamic therapy for fellow eyes with subfoeval choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 108: 2051-2059.
26. Smith D, Fenn P & Drummond M (2004): Cost-effectiveness of photodynamic therapy with verteporfin for age-related macular degeneration: The UK case. Br J Ophthalmol 88: 1107-1112.
27. Torrance G (1986): Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. A review. J Health Economics 5: 1-30.