Lin Jen-Chieh, Yang Ming-Chin
Department of Ophthalmology, Taipei City Hospital, Heping Fuyoy Branch, Taipei, Taiwan; Graduate Institute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Graduate Institute of Health Policy and Management, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Clin Ther. 2014 Oct 1;36(10):1422-30. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2014.07.009. Epub 2014 Aug 19.
Our aim was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of monofocal and multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) for cataract patients in Taiwan.
This prospective nonrandomized study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of monofocal and multifocal IOLs by means of visual performance, visual quality, vision-related quality of life, and spectacle-independence rates. The direct costs were calculated using the payment points of the fee schedule for medical services multiplied by the treatment items. The concept of incremental cost effectiveness ratios was used to evaluate the costs of different types of IOLs in cataract surgery and postoperative outcomes in patients.
A total of 61 patients from the monofocal IOL group (n = 21), multifocal IOL group 1 (n = 22), and multifocal IOL group 2 (n = 18) who completed the study were included in the analysis. No significant differences were observed in mean ages or patient to eye ratio. Significant differences in effectiveness after the implantations of monofocal and multifocal IOLs were observed for spectacle-free rate and monocular contrast sensitivity under glare conditions only. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of monofocal versus multifocal IOLs indicated that it cost an additional $57 to $58 (US dollars) to increase each 1% of the spectacle-independence rate.
This study's results indicated that multifocal IOLs provided better effectiveness on vision-related indicators like the incremental cost effectiveness ratios of postoperative spectacle-independence rate and binocular best-corrected visual acuity measurements at near vision. Our findings suggest that multifocal IOLs can be highly cost effective for patients who prefer to be spectacle free, so it is important to ensure that patients have realistic expectations when making choices between monofocal and multifocal IOLs.
我们的目的是对台湾白内障患者使用单焦点和多焦点人工晶状体(IOL)进行成本效益分析(CEA)。
这项前瞻性非随机研究旨在通过视觉性能、视觉质量、与视力相关的生活质量和无眼镜率来评估单焦点和多焦点IOL的有效性。直接成本使用医疗服务费用表的支付点数乘以治疗项目来计算。增量成本效益比的概念用于评估白内障手术中不同类型IOL的成本以及患者的术后结果。
分析纳入了单焦点IOL组(n = 21)、多焦点IOL组1(n = 22)和多焦点IOL组2(n = 18)中完成研究的61例患者。在平均年龄或患者与眼睛比例方面未观察到显著差异。仅在眩光条件下,单焦点和多焦点IOL植入后的无眼镜率和单眼对比敏感度在有效性方面存在显著差异。单焦点与多焦点IOL的增量成本效益比表明,每提高1%的无眼镜率,成本需额外增加57至58美元(美元)。
本研究结果表明,多焦点IOL在与视力相关的指标上提供了更好的有效性,如术后无眼镜率和近视力双眼最佳矫正视力测量的增量成本效益比。我们的研究结果表明,对于希望摆脱眼镜的患者,多焦点IOL可能具有很高的成本效益,因此在患者选择单焦点和多焦点IOL时确保他们有现实的期望非常重要。