Lifetime cost-effectiveness of myopia control intervention for the children population.

Background: Myopia is a common eye condition and projected to affect half of the global population by 2050. Controlling its progression during childhood may prevent associated ocular diseases in later life. Certain interventions retard myopia progression but their long-term costs and consequences are not well understood. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of myopia control via an optical approach using the Defocus Incorporated Multiple Segments (DIMS) lens over a lifetime. Methods: We constructed an individual-based, state-transition model to simulate 1) the development and progression of myopia in childhood with and without control and 2) the impact of myopia on the development of four sight-threatening complications in adulthood. We compared strategies of myopia control with 100% uptake vs. no myopia control from the societal perspective to determine whether myopia control is value for money. Results: With myopia control, the cumulative prevalence of high myopia was relatively reduced by 44.7% (5.9 vs. 10.7%) and severe visual impairment by 19.2% (2.2 vs. 2.7%) compared to no myopia control. The lifetime cost per quality-adjusted life year gained was 26 407 US dollars (USD) and is considered cost-effective compared to the threshold recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) of one times annual per capita gross domestic product (48 359 USD). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that myopia control had an 87% likelihood of being cost-effective at the WHO threshold. Conclusions: Myopia control is cost-effective when provided to all eligible children. Further investigation is required to determine if it is cost-effective for the government to subsidise myopia control in order to maximise access.

Potential Lost Productivity Resulting from the Global Burden of Myopia: Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Modeling.

PURPOSE: We estimated the potential global economic productivity loss resulting from vision impairment (VI) and blindness as a result of uncorrected myopia and myopic macular degeneration (MMD) in 2015. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Understanding the economic burden of VI associated with myopia is critical to addressing myopia as an increasingly prevalent public health problem. METHODS: We estimated the number of people with myopia and MMD corresponding to critical visual acuity thresholds. Spectacle correction coverage was analyzed against country-level variables from the year of data collection; variation in spectacle correction was described best by a model based on a human development index, with adjustments for urbanization and age. Spectacle correction and myopia data were combined to estimate the number of people with each level of VI resulting from uncorrected myopia. We then applied disability weights, labor force participation rates, employment rates, and gross domestic product per capita to estimate the potential productivity lost among individuals with each level and type of VI resulting from myopia in 2015 in United States dollars (US$). An estimate of care-associated productivity loss also was included. RESULTS: People with myopia are less likely to have adequate optical correction if they are older and live in a rural area of a less developed country. The global potential productivity loss associated with the burden of VI in 2015 was estimated at US$244 billion (95% confidence interval [CI], US$49 billion-US$697 billion) from uncorrected myopia and US$6 billion (95% CI, US$2 billion-US$17 billion) from MMD. Our estimates suggest that the Southeast Asia, South Asia, and East Asia Global Burden of Disease regions bear the greatest potential burden as a proportion of their economic activity, whereas East Asia bears the greatest potential burden in absolute terms. CONCLUSIONS: Even under conservative assumptions, the potential productivity loss associated with VI and blindness resulting from uncorrected myopia is substantially greater than the cost of correcting myopia.

[Epidemiology of myopia]. / Epidemiologie der Myopie.

BACKGROUND: Myopia is the most common cause for impaired vision in children and young adults with increasing tendency. Although myopia is hereditary, genetic findings do not explain the full extent of its recent increase. Epidemiologic studies are required to investigate the prevalence and incidence of this disease. OBJECTIVES: The prevalence, incidence and progression of myopia with its economic impact are emphasized to review the distribution and consequences of the development and progression of myopia. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE. RESULTS: The global prevalence of myopia is currently 28.3 % and is dramatically increasing. In 2050, half of the world population will be affected. Myopia starts earlier and exhibits a peak prevalence in young Asian adults. High myopia indicates a similar development. Interventions to slow the development and progression of myopia are strongly required due to the medical and socio-economic drawbacks for the individuals and for society. CONCLUSION: Myopia is already a ubiquitous phenomenon in some parts of the world. One out of ten persons will be at a relevant risk of becoming blind as a result of myopia in the future. Preventive measures have not shown sweeping success.

The economic cost of myopia in adults aged over 40 years in Singapore.

PURPOSE: To estimate the economic cost of myopia among adults aged 40 years and older in Singapore. METHODS: A substudy of 113 Singaporean adults aged 40 years and older with myopia (spherical equivalent refraction of at least -0.5 diopters) in the population-based ancillary study of Singapore Chinese Eye Study (SCES) was conducted. A health expenditure questionnaire was used to assess the direct cost of myopia. RESULTS: A total of 113 (90.4%) of 125 myopic subjects participated in the survey. The mean cost was approximately SGD$900 (USD$709) per person per year. The lifetime per capita cost ranged from SGD$295 (USD$232) for those with 0 year's duration to SGD$21,616 (USD$17,020) for those with 80 years' duration. Costs of spectacles, contact lenses, and optometry services were the major cost drivers, contributing to an average of 65% of total costs. Seven subjects (6.2%) had undergone LASIK surgery, resulting in a cost of SGD$4891 (USD$3851) per patient per year. Three subjects (2.7%) reported annual costs of (SGD$33 or USD$26) for complications due to LASIK surgery or contact lenses. There was an increasing cost of myopia in adults who started to wear glasses at earlier ages. By applying our cost data to age-specific myopia prevalence data in the whole population in the country, the total cost was estimated to be approximately SGD$959 (USD$755) million per year in Singapore. CONCLUSIONS: Myopia is associated with substantial out-of-pocket expenditure, imposing considerable economic burden for patients. Myopia is a disorder with immense societal costs and public health impact.

The lifetime economic burden of keratoconus: a decision analysis using a markov model.

PURPOSE: To estimate the expected incremental lifetime cost of treatment of keratoconus compared to the expected cost of the treatment of myopia. DESIGN: Cost estimate from the patient's perspective using a Markov decision model. METHODS: We modeled a hypothetical cohort of people with clinically significant incident keratoconus as defined by the Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus (CLEK) Study. We included costs of clinic visits, fitting fees, contact lenses, surgical procedures, and complications. Survival curves of corneal transplants and associated complications were modeled using data from the 2007 Australian Graft Registry. Medical treatment regimens after surgery were defined by expert opinion. RESULTS: The expected value of the lifetime cost of the treatment of keratoconus over myopia was $25 168 with a standard deviation of $16 247 and a median of $17 596. The factors that most influenced the lifetime cost were the probability of initial corneal transplant and a subsequent regraft. The cost of routine care had relatively little influence on the lifetime cost of care. CONCLUSIONS: The expected lifetime cost of treatment of keratoconus represents a significant cost to patients and payors. While the cost of routine care for keratoconus is not trivial, the primary factor influencing changes in the cost of care for keratoconus is the probability of corneal transplant. Combined with the significantly impaired vision-related quality of life and the relatively young onset of disease, the economic burden of the treatment of keratoconus represents a significant public health concern.

Direct costs of myopia in Singapore.

AIMS: To estimate the direct costs of myopia in Singapore children. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 377 Singaporean school children aged 12-17 years from one school in Singapore Cohort study of the Risk factors for Myopia (SCORM) was conducted. A combination of parent and self-administered questionnaires asked about the cost of each optometrist visit, spectacles, and contact lenses, transport costs, father's educational level, and total family income. RESULTS: A total of 377 subjects participated and cost data were available from 301 subjects. The mean annual direct cost of myopia was S$221.7+/-313.7 (CI, S$186.5-258.1) or US$147.8+/-209.1 (CI, US$124.3-172.1) and median annual direct cost of myopia was S$125.0 or US$83.3. The mean cost per pair of spectacles was S$123.2+/-61.2 (CI, S$116.6-129.8) or US$82.1+/-40.8 (CI, US$77.8-86.5). Sixty subjects (15.9%) wore contact lenses. The mean annual cost of contact lenses was S$567.1+/-565.7 (CI, S$422.2-712.0) or US$378.1+/-377.1 (CI, US$281.4-474.6). Subjects of families with higher total family income and those with fathers with secondary or higher education had higher annual direct expenditure (P=0.03 and P=0.001 respectively). Subjects from families with higher household incomes had higher frequency of change of spectacles (P=0.02) and shorter time since the last change of spectacles (P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The mean annual direct cost of myopia for Singapore school children was S$221.68 (US$148) and the median, S$125.00 (US$83.33) per subject. Myopia is associated with significant financial burden in Singapore.

Clinical benefit, complication patterns and cost effectiveness of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in moderate myopia: results of independent meta analyses on clinical outcome and postoperative complication profiles.

PURPOSE: Laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) means a patient investment of 2426 Euro per eye, which usually cannot be funded by European health care insurers. In the context of recent resource allocation discussions, however, the cost effectiveness of LASIK could become an important indication of allocation decisions. Therefore an evidence based estimation of its incremental cost effectiveness was intended. METHODS: Three independent meta analyses were implemented to estimate the refractive gain (dpt) due to conventional LASIK procedures as well as the predictability of the latter (%) (fraction of eyes achieving a postoperative refraction with maximum deviation of +/- 0.5 dpt from the target refraction). Study reports of 1995 - 2004 (English or German language) were screened for appropriate key words. Meta effects in refractive gain and predictability were estimated by means and standard deviations of reported effect measures. Cost data were estimated by German DRG rates and individual clinical pathway calculations; cost effectiveness was then computed in terms of the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) for both clinical benefit endpoints. A sensitivity analysis comprised cost variations of +/- 10 % and utility variations alongside the meta effects' 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Total direct costs from the patients' perspective were estimated at 2426 Euro per eye, associated with a refractive meta benefit of 5.93 dpt (95% meta confidence interval 5.32 - 6.54 dpt) and a meta predictability of 67% (43% - 91%). In terms of incremental costs, the unilateral LASIK implied a patient investion of 409 Euro (sensitivity range 351 - 473 Euro) per gained refractive unit or 36 Euro (27 - 56 Euro) per gained percentage point in predictability. When LASIK associated complication patterns were considered, the total direct costs amounted up to 3075 Euro, resulting in incremental costs of 519 Euro / dpt (sensitivity range 445 - 600 Euro / dpt) or 46 Euro / % (34 - 72 Euro / %). Most frequently reported LASIK complications were "central islands / over- / undercorrection / regression" (meta incidence estimate 24%) and "haze" (15%), which were identified by means of an independent meta analysis. CONCLUSION: Bearing incremental costs of 519 Euro per gained refractive unit in mind, the conventional LASIK procedures showed an encouraging cost effectiveness range; the latter estimate may serve as a rationale for future allocation discussions in ophthalmology.

First 100 CustomCornea commercial eyes.

PURPOSE: With the advent of wavefront-guided custom abalation we not only try to reach a target of 20/20 vision, but strive for improvement in what has always been most important--the quality of this vision. METHODS AND RESULTS: Insights are presented, based on clinical experience at Durrie Vision with our first 100 commercial CustomCornea eyes. We highlight key points for preparing a clinical practice for this new technology, such as staff training, marketing, and pricing. We discuss technical aspects such as patient selection and target adjustment as they relate to the Alcon LADARWave system. CONCLUSION: In our practice we have thus far had clinical success with CustomCornea; patient acceptance has been high, and by closely monitoring our first few patients we were able to reduce the number of future enhancements.

Screening and preventable illness.

If an agent does not discount the future at a constant rate, as in some forms of myopia, her optimal strategy is unattainable without some commitment device. We apply this familiar idea to a model of screening and disease prevention, and explore how financial incentives can correct suboptimal health choices. In general, myopia need not imply under-screening. While the optimal intervention for prevention effort is a state-invariant subsidy, the optimal intervention for screening may involve a tax or a subsidy. When screening and prevention are coincident, a simple and practical subsidy equal to one minus the discount factor to both screening and intervention is indicated.

[Bilateral simultaneous LASIK. Pro and contra]. / Bilaterale simultane LASIK. Pro und Kontra.

Until recently simultaneous bilateral laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) was regarded as contraindicated in Germany. However, the procedure was sporadically performed, because it offers patient comfort and is more cost effective than sequential LASIK. Even though the complication rate is below the calculated rate of 0.01%, bilateral complications may have catastrophic effects on the patient. In addition, there is the theoretical disadvantage that the results from the first eye cannot be used for the second eye. However, this effect has yet to be clinically proven.

The socioeconomic aspects of laser refractive surgery.

Excimer laser photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) has shown promising results in preliminary studies. However, even if long-term safety and efficacy are demonstrated, questions have been raised about its viability from a cost-effectiveness perspective. We analyzed the economic investment of elective excimer laser PRK both from the societal and individual perspectives. When the present value of likely expenses associated with excimer laser PRK and follow-up care are compared with those entailed in wearing soft contact lenses, PRK is roughly equivalent to daily wear soft contact lenses over a 10-year horizon and considerably less expensive than extended-wear soft contact lenses. When the analytic perspective is extended to 20 years, excimer laser PRK is a less expensive investment than both daily wear and extended-wear soft contact lenses.