Elhusseiny Abdelrahman M, Yannuzzi Nicolas A, Smiddy William E
Department of Ophthalmology, Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida; Department of Ophthalmology, Kasr Al Ainy School of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Department of Ophthalmology, Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.
Ophthalmol Retina. 2019 Nov;3(11):956-961. doi: 10.1016/j.oret.2019.06.003. Epub 2019 Jun 12.
To perform a cost-utility analysis and comparison between pneumatic retinopexy (PR) and pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) repair.
A cost-utility analysis using decision analysis.
There were no participants.
A decision analysis model was constructed based on results from the Pneumatic Retinopexy versus Vitrectomy for the Management of Primary Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment Outcomes Randomized Trial to calculate the costs, lifetime usefulness, and lifetime cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for the treatment of RRD with PR or PPV. Data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services were used to calculate the associated adjusted costs in facility and nonfacility practice settings.
Cost of intervention, utility gain over natural history, QALY gained, and cost per QALY.
The total imputed costs (all in 2019 United States dollars) for primary repair of RRD in facility and nonfacility settings were $4451 and $2456, respectively, in the PR group and $7108 and $4514, respectively, in the PPV group. The estimated lifetime QALYs gained were 5.9 and 5.4 in the PR and PPV groups, respectively. The cost per QALY for facility and nonfacility settings was $751 and $414, respectively, in the PR group and $1312 and $833, respectively, in the PPV group.
Cost-utility analysis of both PR and PPV demonstrated excellent results for both methods for RRD repair, with the metrics for PR somewhat more favorable independent of the practice settings (facility or nonfacility based).
对原发性孔源性视网膜脱离(RRD)修复术采用气体视网膜固定术(PR)和玻璃体切除术(PPV)进行成本效益分析和比较。
采用决策分析的成本效益分析。
无参与者。
基于原发性孔源性视网膜脱离治疗结果随机试验中气体视网膜固定术与玻璃体切除术的结果构建决策分析模型,以计算采用PR或PPV治疗RRD的成本、终身效用以及每质量调整生命年(QALY)的终身成本。使用医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心的数据来计算在医疗机构和非医疗机构环境中的相关调整成本。
干预成本、相对于自然病程的效用增益、获得的QALY以及每QALY的成本。
在医疗机构和非医疗机构环境中,PR组RRD初次修复的总估算成本(均以2019年美元计)分别为4451美元和2456美元,PPV组分别为7108美元和4514美元。PR组和PPV组估计获得的终身QALY分别为5.9和5.4。在医疗机构和非医疗机构环境中,PR组每QALY的成本分别为751美元和414美元,PPV组分别为1312美元和833美元。
PR和PPV的成本效益分析表明,两种方法对RRD修复均有出色结果,且PR的各项指标在独立于实践环境(基于医疗机构或非医疗机构)的情况下更为有利。