Cost-effectiveness of screening for open angle glaucoma in developed countries

Indian Journal of Ophthalmology

Volumn 59, Issue SUPPL. 1, 2011, Pages

  Tuulonen, Anja ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OULU   (Finland)

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness; glaucoma; screening

Indexed keywords

CONFERENCE PAPER; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DEVELOPED COUNTRY; ECONOMICS; EVALUATION; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; MASS SCREENING; MEDICAL RESEARCH; OPEN ANGLE GLAUCOMA; STANDARD;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DEVELOPED COUNTRIES; GLAUCOMA; GLAUCOMA, OPEN-ANGLE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING;

EID: 78650823968     PISSN: 03014738     EISSN: 19983689     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4103/0301-4738.73684     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (43)

1. Cost-effectiveness of screening. In: Terminology and Guidelines for Glaucoma, European Glaucoma Society. 3rd ed. Savona, Italy, Dogma, 2008; p. 25-31. Available from: http://www.eugs.org/eng/EGS-guidelines.asp
2. Burr JM, Mowatt G, Hernández R, Siddiqui MA, J Cook, Lourenco T, et al. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening for open angle glaucoma: A systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technology Assessment 2007;11:41. Available from: http://www.ncchta.org/news/ newsitem211107.shtml
3. Vaahtoranta-Lehtonen H, Tuulonen A, Aronen P, Sintonen H, Suoranta L, Kovanen N, et al. Cost effectiveness and cost utility of an organized screening programme for glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2007;85:508-18.
4. Olthoff CM, Schouten JS, van de Borne BW, Webers CA. Noncompliance with ocular hypotensive treatment in patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension an evidence-based review. Ophthalmology 2005;112:953-61.
5. Grdum K, Heijl A, Bengtsson B. A comparison of glaucoma patients identified through mass screening and in routine clinical practice. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2002;80:627-31.
6. Mukesh BN, McCarty CA, Rait JL, Taylor HR. Five-year incidence of open-angle glaucoma: The visual impairment project. Ophthalmology 2002;109:1047-51.
7. Tuulonen A, Sintonen H. Health economics, cost-effectiveness and glaucoma care. In: Grehn F, Stamper R, editors. Glaucoma. Berlin: Springer; 2006. p. 123-33.
8. Williams A. Priorities and research strategy in health economics for the 1990s. Health Economics. Quest Editorial 1993;2:295-302.
9. Muir Gray JA. Evidence-based healthcare. How to make health policy and management decisions. Churchill Livingstone, Harcourt Publisher Limited; 2001.
10. Evans RG. A conclusion in search of arguments: Economists and the quest for more regressive health care financing. The Proceedings of the Yrjö Jahnsson Foundation 50th Anniversary Symposium on Incentives and Finance of Health Care System, Helsinki, Finland, August 9-10, 2004.
11. Drummond MF, Richardson WS, O'Brien BJ, Levine M, Heyland D. Users Guides to the Medical Literature XIII. How to use an article on economic analysis of clinical practice A. Are the results of the study valid? JAMA 1997;277:1552-7.
12. O'Brien BJ, Heyland D, Richardson WS, Levine M, Drummond MF. Users' guides to the medical literature. XIII. How to use an article on economic analysis of clinical practice. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1997;277:1802-06.
13. Finckler SA. The distinction between cost and charges. Ann Intern Med 1982;96:102-9.
14. Albright CD, Schuman SG, Netland PA. Usage and cost of laser trabeculoplaty in the United States. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers 2002;33:334-6.
15. Kobelt G. Glaucoma Care Updates. Health economics, economic evaluation, and glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2002;11:531-9.
16. Hawthorne G, Richardson J, Day NA. A comparison of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) with four other generic utility instruments. Ann Med 2001;33:358-70.
17. Stavem K. Reliability, validity and responsiveness of two multiattribute utility measures in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Qual Life Res 1999;8:45-54.
18. Sintonen H. The 15D instrument of health-related quality of life: properties and applications. Ann Med 2001;33:328-36. (Pubitemid 32675373)
19. Briggs A, Sculpher M. An introduction to Markov modelling for economic evaluation. Pharmacoeconomics 1998;13:397-409.
20. Kymes SM, Kass MA, Anderson DR, Miller JP, Gordon MO. Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS). Management of ocular hypertension: A cost-effectiveness approach from the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study. Am J Ophthalmol 2006;141: 997-1008.
21. Kymes SM, Plotzke MR, Kass MA, Boland MV, Gordon MO. Effect of patient's life expectancy on the cost-effectiveness of treatment for ocular hypertension. Arch Ophthalmol 2010;128:613-8.
22. Kymes SM. An introduction to decision analysis in the economic evaluation of the prevention and treatment of vision-related diseases. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2008;15:76-83.
23. Sterman J. All models are wrong: reflections on becoming s systems scientist. System Dynamics Review 2002;18:501-31.
24. Tuulonen A. The effects of structures on decision-making policies in health care. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2005;83:611-7.
25. Brown GC. Vision and quality of life. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 1999;97:473-511.
26. Kobelt G, Jonsson B, Bergström A, Chen E, Lindén C, Alm A. Cost-effectiveness analysis in glaucoma: what drives utility? Results from a pilot study in Sweden. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2006;84:363-71.
27. Rein DB, Wittenborn JS, Lee PP, Wirth KE, Sorensen SW, Hoerger TJ, et al. The cost-effectiveness of routine office-based identification and subsequent medical treatment of primary Open-Angle Glaucoma in the United States. Ophthalmology 2009;116:823-32.
28. Fleming C, Whitlock E, Beil T. Primary care screening for ocular hypertension and primary open-angle glaucoma. Evidence synthesis 2005;34. Contract No. 290-02-0024, Oregon Evidence-Based Practice Center Available from: http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstf05/glaucoma/glaucsyn.pdf.
29. Siddiqui MA, Azuara-Blanco A, Burr J. The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies published in ophthalmic journals. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005;89:261-5.
30. Stoutenbeek R, de Voogd S, Wolfs RC, Hofman A, de Jong PT, Jansonius NM. The additional yield of a periodic screening programme for open-angle glaucoma: A population-based comparison of incident glaucoma cases detected in regular ophthalmic care with cases detected during screening. Br J Ophthalmol 2008;92:1222-6.
31. Healey P, Tuulonen A and the WGA consensus working group. Is the cost of case finding (including diagnosis and treatment of patients diagnosed) economically balanced in relation to possible expenditure on medical care as a whole? In: Weinreb RN, Healey PT, Topouzis F, editors. Glaucoma screening. WGA Consensus Series-5. Daytona Beach, Fl, USA: Kugler Publications; 2008. p. 40-5.
32. Fisher ES, Welch HG. Avoiding the unintended consequences of growth in medical care. How might more be worse? JAMA 1999;281:446-53.
33. Fisher ES, Wennberg DE, Stukel TA, Gottlieb DJ, Lucas FL, Pinder EL. The implications of regional variations in Medicare spending. Part 1: the content, quality, and accessibility of care. Ann Intern Med 2003;138:273-87.
34. Fisher ES, Wennberg DE, Stukel TA, Gottlieb DJ, Lucas FL, Pinder EL. The implications of regional variations in Medicare spending. Part 2: health outcomes and satisfaction with care. Ann Intern Med 2003;138:288-98.
35. Schmier JK, Halpern MT, Jones ML. The economic implications of glaucoma: A literature review. Pharmacoeconomics 2007;25:287-308.
36. Tuulonen A Economics of surgery worldwide. Developed countries. In: Sharaawy TM, Sherwood MB, Hitchings RA, Crowston JG, editors. Glaucoma. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Company. 2009. p. 3-11.
37. Orme M, Boler A. Prostaglandin analogues for the treatment of glaucoma and ocular hypertension: a systematic review of economic evidence. Pharmacoeconomics 2006;24:743-50.
38. Puolijoki H, Tuulonen A. Evaluation of the education of specialists in medicine and specialists in dentistry. Reports of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, Helsinki, Finland, 2007. p. 47.
39. Tuulonen A, Azuara-Blanco A. Cost-effectiveness. Letter to the editor. Ophthalmology 2009;116:166-7.
40. Jorgensen AW, Hilden J, Gotzsche PC. Cochrane reviews compared with industry supported meta-analysis and other meta-analyses of the same drugs: Systematic review. BMJ 2006;333:782-6.
41. Sommer A. Getting what we deserve, health and medical care in America. ISBN-13: 978-0-8018-9387-2. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2009.
42. Maynard A. Ethics and health care underfunding. J Med Ethics 2001;27:223-31.
43. Tuulonen A, Salminen H, Linna M, Perkola M. The need and total cost of Finnish eye care services: A simulation model for 2005-2040. Acta Ophthalmol 2009;87:820-9.