Falls and health status in elderly women following first eye cataract surgery: An economic evaluation conducted alongside a randomised controlled trial

British Journal of Ophthalmology

Volumn 91, Issue 12, 2007, Pages 1675-1679

  Sach, Tracey H ^a   Foss, Alexander J E ^b   Gregson, Richard M ^b   Zaman, Anwar ^b   Osborn, Francis ^b   Masud, Tahir ^c   Harwood, Rowan H ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^b QUEEN S MEDICAL CENTRE   (United Kingdom)

^c NOTTINGHAM CITY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; CATARACT; CATARACT EXTRACTION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONSERVATIVE TREATMENT; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ELDERLY CARE; FALLING; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH SERVICE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ACCIDENTAL FALLS; AGED; CATARACT; CATARACT EXTRACTION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; MODELS, ECONOMIC; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; VISUAL ACUITY;

EID: 36749032359     PISSN: 00071161     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2007.118687     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Drummond M, Schulpher M, Torrance GW, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes, third edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
2. Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 1996;37:53-72.
3. Brazier JE, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002;21:271-92.
4. Feeny D, Furlong W, Boyle M, et al. Multi-attribute health status classification systems: health utilities index. Pharmacoeconomics 1995;7:490-502.
5. NICE. Guide to the Methods of technology appraisal, April 2004. Accessed online on 21 February 2007 [http://www.nice.org.uk/pdf/TAP_Methods.pdf] .
6. Reidy A, Minassian DC, Vafidis G, et al. Prevalence of serious eye disease and visual impairment in a north London population: population based, cross sectional study. BMJ 1998;316:1643-6.
7. Minassian DC, Reidy A, Desai P, et al. The deficit in cataract surgery in England and Wales and the escalating problem of visual impairment: epidemiological modelling of the population dynamics of cataract. Br J Ophthalmol 2000;84:4-8.
8. Department of Health. The NHS plan: a plan for investment, a plan for reform. London: HMSO, 2000:101-105, Accessed online on 3 January 2007 [http://www.dh.gov.uk/assetRoot/04/05/57/83/04055783.pdf].
9. Desai P, Reidy A, Minassian DC. Profile of patients presenting for cataract surgery in the UK: national data collection. Br J Ophthalmol 1999;83:893-6.
10. Leinonen J, Laatikainen L. Changes in visual acuity of patients undergoing cataract surgery during the last two decades. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2002;80:506-11.
11. Harwood RH, Foss AJ, Osborn F, et al. Falls and health status in elderly women following first eye cataract surgery: a randomised controlled trial. Br J Ophthalmol 2005;89:53-9.
12. Curtis L, Netten A. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2004. Accessed on-line on 14 March 2006 [http://www.pssru.ac.uk/pdf/uc2004/uc2004.pdf] .
13. Department of Health. NHS reference costs 2003, Accessed online 13 October 2005 [http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/ Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4070195].
14. National Statistics. New earnings survey 2003, Accessed online on 21 February 2007 [http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_labour/ NES2003_Analyses_For_Part-Time_Employees/Vol_F.pdf].
15. Sach TH, Whynes DK. Measuring indirect costs: is there a problem? Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2003;2:135-9.
16. Torrance GW. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. J Health Econ 1986;5:1-30.
17. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, et al. A social tariff for the EuroQol: results from a UK general population survey (Discussion Paper 138). University of York: Centre for Health Economics 1995. Accessed online on 21 February 2007 [http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/che/pdf/DP138.pdf].
18. Lansingh VC, Carter MJ, Martens M. Global cost-effectiveness of cataract surgery. Ophthalmology 2007;114:1670-8.
19. Government Actuary Department Interim Life Tables. Accessed online on 16 November 2006 [http://www.gad.gov.uk/Life_Tables/Interim_life_tables.htm] .
20. Leske MC, Chylack LT, He Q, et al. Incidence and progression of cortical and posterior subcapsular opacities: the Longitudinal Study of Cataract. The LSC Group. Ophthalmology 1997;104:1987-93.
21. Leske MC, Wu SY, Nemesure B, et al. Incidence and progression of lens opacities in the Barbados Eye Studies. Ophthalmology 2000;107:1267-73.
22. Magno BV, Datiles MB, Lasa MS. Progression of lens opacities in cataract patients after one year. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1995;73:45-9.
23. HM Treasury. Green Book. Appraisal and evaluation in central government, 2003. Accessed online 21 February 2007 [http://www.hm-treasury.gov. uk/Economic_Data_and_Tools/greenbook/data_greenbook_index.cfm].
24. Heyse JF, Cook JR, Carides GW. Statistical considerations in analysing health care resource utilization and cost data. In:Drummond M, McGuire A, editors. Economic evaluation in health care. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001:215-35.
25. Fenwick E, Claxton K, Sculpher MJ. Representing uncertainty: the role of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Health Econ 2001;10:779-87.
26. Towse A, Pritchard C, Devlin N. Cost effectiveness thresholds: economic and ethical issues. London: Office of Health Economics, November, 2002.
27. Raftery J. NICE: faster access to modern treatments? Analysis of guidance on health technologies. BMJ 2001;320:1300-3.
28. Wolstenholme J, Gray A. Making difficult choices: decision making in health care. Accessed on 21 February 2007 [www.herc.ox.ac.uk/research/ QALY_league_table.pdf].
29. Naeim A, Keeler EB, Gutierrez PR, et al. Is cataract surgery cost-effective among older patients with a low predicted probability for improvement in reported visual functioning? Med Care 2006;44:982-9.