How much can we learn from each other? Polish and Hungarian good practices in financing ophthalmology care as a proposal for implementation in Ukraine.

OBJECTIVES: The article aims to compare payment schemes for cataract, glaucoma, vitrectomy, cornea transplantations, DME, and AMD across Hungary, Poland, and Ukraine, and to identify implementable practices in Ukraine within the context of ongoing healthcare reforms. METHODS: Researchers used mixed-method research-with legal documents and data analysis on utilisation of ophthalmology services between 2010 and 2019 and in-depth semi structured interviews with fifteen health experts from Hungary, Poland, and Ukraine. Interviewees, five from each country, were representatives from healthcare providers and payers with at least 10 years' experience in ophthalmology care and knowledge about financing schemes in each country of residence. RESULTS: We identified significant differences in healthcare delivery and financing of ophthalmology services between Hungary and Poland, despite both countries rely on Diagnosis-Related Group (DRG) based systems for hospital care. Good practices for financing specific eye treatments like cataract, glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration (AMD), diabetic macular edema (DME), cornea transplantations, and vitrectomy are identified. The financing scheme, including financial products and incentives, can influence the volume of treatments. Access to ophthalmic care is a key concern, with differences in treatment schemes between Hungary (ambulatory care) and Poland (hospital care), leading to higher costs and the need for centralization of complex procedures like cornea transplantations. CONCLUSIONS: The article highlights the importance of incentivizing quality improvements and removing financial barriers in Poland, while Hungary should focus on continuous monitoring of treatment methods and flexibility in reimbursement. For Ukraine, the research findings are significant due to ongoing healthcare reform, and the country seeks optimal practices while considering the experiences of other countries.

A systematic review of economic evaluation of artificial intelligence-based screening for eye diseases: From possibility to reality.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become a focus of research in the rapidly evolving field of ophthalmology. Nevertheless, there is a lack of systematic studies on the health economics of AI in this field. We examine studies from the PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science databases that employed quantitative analysis, retrieved up to July 2023. Most of the studies indicate that AI leads to cost savings and improved efficiency in ophthalmology. On the other hand, some studies suggest that using AI in healthcare may raise costs for patients, especially when taking into account factors such as labor costs, infrastructure, and patient adherence. Future research should cover a wider range of ophthalmic diseases beyond common eye conditions. Moreover, conducting extensive health economic research, designed to collect data relevant to its own context, is imperative.

Teleophthalmology at a primary and tertiary eye care network from India: environmental and economic impact.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the environmental and economic impact of teleophthalmological services provided by a primary (rural) and tertiary (urban) eyecare network in India. METHODS: This prospective study utilised a random sampling method, and administered an environmental and economic impact assessment questionnaire. The study included 324 (primary: 173; tertiary: 151) patients who received teleconsultations from July to September 2022. The primary network (rural) used a colour-coded triage system (Green: eye conditions managed by teleconsult alone; yellow: semi-urgent referral within 1 week to a month, red: urgent referral within a day to a week). The tertiary network (urban) included new and follow-up patients. The environmental impact was assessed by estimating the potential CO2 emissions saved by avoiding travel for various transport modes. Economic impact measured by the potential cost savings from direct (travel) and indirect (food and wages lost) expenses spent by yellow and red referrals (primary) and the first-visit expenses of follow-up (tertiary) patients. RESULTS: The primary rural network saved 2.89 kg CO2/person and 80 km/person. The tertiary urban network saved 176.6 kg CO2/person and 1666 km/person. The potential cost savings on travel expenses were INR 19,970 (USD 250) for the primary (average: INR 370 (USD 4.6) per patient) and INR 758,870 (USD 9486) for the tertiary network (average: INR 8339 (USD 104) per patient). Indirect cost savings (food and wages) were of INR 29,100 (USD 364) for the primary and INR 347,800 (USD 4347) for the tertiary network. CONCLUSION: Teleophthalmology offers substantial environmental and economic benefits in rural and urban eyecare systems.

Comparison of Incremental Costs and Medicare Reimbursement for Simple vs Complex Cataract Surgery Using Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing.

Importance: Cataract surgery is one of the most commonly performed surgeries across medicine and an integral part of ophthalmologic care. Complex cataract surgery requires more time and resources than simple cataract surgery, yet it remains unclear whether the incremental reimbursement for complex cataract surgery, compared with simple cataract surgery, offsets the increased costs. Objective: To measure the difference in day-of-surgery costs and net earnings between simple and complex cataract surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study is an economic analysis at a single academic institution using time-driven activity-based costing methodology to determine the operative-day costs of simple and complex cataract surgery. Process flow mapping was used to define the operative episode limited to the day of surgery. Simple and complex cataract surgery cases (Current Procedural Terminology codes 66984 and 66982, respectively) at the University of Michigan Kellogg Eye Center from 2017 to 2021 were included in the analysis. Time estimates were obtained using an internal anesthesia record system. Financial estimates were obtained using a mix of internal sources and prior literature. Supply costs were obtained from the electronic health record. Main Outcomes and Measures: Difference in day-of-surgery costs and net earnings. Results: A total of 16 092 cataract surgeries were included, 13 904 simple and 2188 complex. Time-based day-of-surgery costs for simple and complex cataract surgery were $1486.24 and $2205.83, respectively, with a mean difference of $719.59 (95% CI, $684.09-$755.09; P < .001). Complex cataract surgery required $158.26 more for costs of supplies and materials (95% CI, $117.00-$199.60; P < .001). The total difference in day-of-surgery costs between complex and simple cataract surgery was $877.85. Incremental reimbursement for complex cataract surgery was $231.01; therefore, complex cataract surgery had a negative earnings difference of $646.84 compared with simple cataract surgery. Conclusions and Relevance: This economic analysis suggests that the incremental reimbursement for complex cataract surgery undervalues the resource costs required for the procedure, failing to cover increased costs and accounting for less than 2 minutes of increased operating time. These findings may affect ophthalmologist practice patterns and access to care for certain patients, which may ultimately justify increasing cataract surgery reimbursement.

Assessment of patient follow-up from student-run free eye clinic to county ophthalmology clinic.

The Ophthalmology Student Interest Group at Indiana University School of Medicine provides a free student-run eye screening clinic for an underserved community in Indianapolis. Patients with abnormal findings are referred to the ophthalmology service of the local county hospital for further evaluation. This retrospective chart review studied 180 patients referred from our free eye clinic to follow up at the ophthalmology service of a local county hospital from October 2013 to February 2020. This study investigated factors impacting follow-up of patients by analyzing demographics, medical history, insurance coverage, and final diagnoses at follow-up. Thirty-five (19.4%) of 180 patients successfully followed up at the local county hospital with an average time to follow-up of 14.4 (± 15.9) months. Mean patient age was 51 (± 13.6) with nearly equal numbers of males and females. The most common diagnoses at follow-up included refractive error (51.4%), cataract (45.7%), and glaucoma (28.6%). Patients with diabetes diagnoses or Healthy Indiana Plan insurance coverage had increased probability of follow-up. This study reveals gaps in timely follow-up to the local county hospital, demonstrating the current limitations of our free clinic in connecting patients to more definitive care and the need for an improved referral process.

SUCCESSFUL INTERVENTIONS TO IMPROVE EFFICIENCY AND REDUCE PATIENT VISIT DURATION IN A RETINA PRACTICE.

PURPOSE: To reduce the total clinic visit duration among retina providers in an academic ophthalmology department. METHODS: All patient encounters across all providers in the department were analyzed to determine baseline clinic visit duration time, defined as the elapsed time between appointment time and checkout. To increase photography capacity, a major bottleneck identified through root cause analysis, four interventions were implemented: training ophthalmic technicians to perform fundus photography in addition to optical coherence tomographies, relocating photography equipment to be adjacent to examination rooms, procuring three additional Optos widefield retinal photography units, and shifting staff schedules to better align with that of the providers. These interventions were implemented in the clinics of two retina providers. RESULTS: The average baseline visit duration for all patients across all providers was 87 minutes (19,550 patient visits). The previous average visit duration was 80 minutes for Provider 1 (557 patient visits) and 81 minutes for Provider 2 (1,246 patient visits). In the 4 weeks after interventions were implemented, the average visit duration decreased to 60 minutes for Provider 1 and 57 minutes for Provider 2. CONCLUSION: A systematic approach and a multidisciplinary team resulted in targeted, cost-effective interventions that reduced total visit durations.

Drivers of Medicare Spending: A 15-Year Review of Radiation Oncology Charges Allowed by the Medicare Physician/Supplier Fee-for-Service Program Compared With Other Specialties.

PURPOSE: In 2019, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services proposed a new radiation oncology alternative payment model aimed at reducing expenditures. We examined changes in aggregate physician Medicare charges allowed per specialty to provide contemporary context to proposed changes and hypothesize that radiation oncology charges remained stable through 2017. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Medicare physician/supplier utilization, program payments, and balance billing for original Medicare beneficiaries, by physician specialty, were analyzed from 2002 to 2017. Total allowed charges under the physician/supplier fee-for-service program, inflation-adjusted charges, and percent of total charges billed per specialty were examined. We adjusted for inflation using the consumer price index for medical care from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. RESULTS: Total allowed charges increased from $83 billion in 2002 to $138 billion in 2017. The specialties accounting for the most charges billed to Medicare were internal medicine and ophthalmology. Radiation oncology charges accounted for 1.2%, 1.6%, and 1.4% of total charges allowed by Medicare in 2002, 2012, and 2017, respectively. Radiation oncology charges allowed increased 44% from 2002 to 2012 ($987.6 million to $1.42 billion) but decreased by 19% from 2012 to 2017 ($1.15 billion), adjusted for inflation. Total charges allowed by internal medicine decreased 2% from 2002 to 2012 ($8.53 to $8.36 billion), adjusted for inflation, and decreased 16% from 2012 to 2017 ($7.05 billion). When adjusting for inflation, ophthalmology charges increased 18% from 2002 to 2012 ($4.53 to $5.36 billion) and increased 3% from 2012 to 2017 ($5.5 billion). CONCLUSIONS: Radiation oncology physician charges represent a small fraction of total Medicare expenses and are not a driver for Medicare spending. Aggregate inflation-adjusted charges by radiation oncology have dramatically declined in the past 5 years and represent a stable fraction of total Medicare charges. The need to target radiation oncology with cost-cutting measures may be overstated.

Process Mapping and Activity-Based Costing of the Intravitreal Injection Procedure.

PURPOSE/AIM OF THE STUDY: To quantify the cost of performing an intravitreal injection (IVI) utilizing activity-based costing (ABC), which allocates a cost to each resource involved in a manufacturing process. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, observational cohort study was performed at an urban, multi-specialty ophthalmology practice affiliated with an academic institution. Fourteen patients scheduled for an IVI-only visit with a retina ophthalmologist were observed from clinic entry to exit to create a process map of time and resource utilization. Indirect costs were allocated with ABC and direct costs were estimated based on process map observations, internal accounting records, employee interviews, and nationally-reported metrics. The primary outcome measure was the cost of an IVI procedure in United States dollars. Secondary outcomes included operating income (cost subtracted from revenue) of an IVI and patient-centric time utilization for an IVI. RESULTS: The total cost of performing an IVI was $128.28; average direct material, direct labor, and overhead costs were $2.14, $97.88, and $28.26, respectively. Compared to the $104.40 reimbursement set by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for Current Procedural Terminology code 67028, this results in a negative operating income of -$23.88 (-22.87%). The median clinic resource-utilizing time to complete an IVI was 32:58 minutes (range [19:24-1:28:37]); the greatest bottleneck was physician-driven electronic health record documentation. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides an objective and accurate cost estimate of the IVI procedure and illustrates how ABC may be applied in a clinical context. Our findings suggest that IVIs may currently be undervalued by payors.

Health economic evaluation in ophthalmology.

Health economic evaluation is the application of economic theories, tools and concepts to healthcare. In the setting of limited resources, increasing demand and a growing array of intervention options, economic evaluation provides a framework for measuring, valuing and comparing the costs and benefits of different healthcare interventions. This review provides an overview of the concepts and methods of economic evaluation, illustrated with examples in ophthalmology. Types of economic evaluation include cost-minimisation, cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, cost-utility and economic modelling. Topics including utility measures, the quality-adjusted lifeyear, discounting, perspective and timeframe are discussed. Health economic evaluation is important to understand the costs and value of interventions in ophthalmology and to inform health policy as well as guide clinical decision-making.

Artificial intelligence for teleophthalmology-based diabetic retinopathy screening in a national programme: an economic analysis modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Deep learning is a novel machine learning technique that has been shown to be as effective as human graders in detecting diabetic retinopathy from fundus photographs. We used a cost-minimisation analysis to evaluate the potential savings of two deep learning approaches as compared with the current human assessment: a semi-automated deep learning model as a triage filter before secondary human assessment; and a fully automated deep learning model without human assessment. METHODS: In this economic analysis modelling study, using 39 006 consecutive patients with diabetes in a national diabetic retinopathy screening programme in Singapore in 2015, we used a decision tree model and TreeAge Pro to compare the actual cost of screening this cohort with human graders against the simulated cost for semi-automated and fully automated screening models. Model parameters included diabetic retinopathy prevalence rates, diabetic retinopathy screening costs under each screening model, cost of medical consultation, and diagnostic performance (ie, sensitivity and specificity). The primary outcome was total cost for each screening model. Deterministic sensitivity analyses were done to gauge the sensitivity of the results to key model assumptions. FINDINGS: From the health system perspective, the semi-automated screening model was the least expensive of the three models, at US$62 per patient per year. The fully automated model was $66 per patient per year, and the human assessment model was $77 per patient per year. The savings to the Singapore health system associated with switching to the semi-automated model are estimated to be $489 000, which is roughly 20% of the current annual screening cost. By 2050, Singapore is projected to have 1 million people with diabetes; at this time, the estimated annual savings would be $15 million. INTERPRETATION: This study provides a strong economic rationale for using deep learning systems as an assistive tool to screen for diabetic retinopathy. FUNDING: Ministry of Health, Singapore.

The Importance of Telemedicine during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Focus on Diabetic Retinopathy.

Recently, telemedicine has become remarkably important, due to increased deployment and development of digital technologies. National and international guidelines should consider its inclusion in their updates. During the COVID-19 pandemic, mandatory social distancing and the lack of effective treatments has made telemedicine the safest interactive system between patients, both infected and uninfected, and clinicians. A few potential evidence-based scenarios for the application of telemedicine have been hypothesized. In particular, its use in diabetes and complication monitoring has been remarkably increasing, due to the high risk of poor prognosis. New evidence and technological improvements in telemedicine application in diabetic retinopathy (DR) have demonstrated efficacy and usefulness in screening. Moreover, despite an initial increase for devices and training costs, teleophthalmology demonstrated a good cost-to-efficacy ratio; however, no national screening program has yet focused on DR prevention and diagnosis. Lack of data during the COVID-19 pandemic strongly limits the possibility of tracing the real management of the disease, which is only conceivable from past evidence in normal conditions. The pandemic further stressed the importance of remote monitoring. However, the deployment of device and digital application used to increase screening of individuals and monitor progression of retinal disease needs to be easily accessible to general practitioners.

Differences in characteristics of Medicare patients treated by ophthalmologists and optometrists.

PURPOSE: To quantify differences in the age, gender, race, and clinical complexity of Medicare beneficiaries treated by ophthalmologists and optometrists in each of the United States. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study based on publicly accessible Medicare payment and utilization data from 2012 through 2017. METHODS: For each ophthalmic and optometric provider, demographic information of treated Medicare beneficiaries was obtained from the Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for the years 2012 through 2017. Clinical complexity was defined using CMS Hierarchical Condition Category (HCC) coding. RESULTS: From 2012 through 2017, ophthalmologists in every state treated statistically significantly older beneficiaries, with the greatest difference (4.99 years in 2014) between provider groups seen in Rhode Island. In most states there was no gender difference among patients treated by the providers but in 46 states ophthalmologists saw a more racially diverse group of beneficiaries. HCC risk score analysis demonstrated that ophthalmologists in all 50 states saw more medically complex beneficiaries and the differences were statistically significant in 47 states throughout all six years. CONCLUSIONS: Although there are regional variations in the characteristics of patients treated by ophthalmologists and optometrists, ophthalmologists throughout the United States manage older, more racially diverse, and more medically complex Medicare beneficiaries.

Artificial intelligence for diabetic retinopathy screening, prediction and management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Diabetic retinopathy is the most common specific complication of diabetes mellitus. Traditional care for patients with diabetes and diabetic retinopathy is fragmented, uncoordinated and delivered in a piecemeal nature, often in the most expensive and high-resource tertiary settings. Transformative new models incorporating digital technology are needed to address these gaps in clinical care. RECENT FINDINGS: Artificial intelligence and telehealth may improve access, financial sustainability and coverage of diabetic retinopathy screening programs. They enable risk stratifying patients based on individual risk of vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy including diabetic macular edema (DME), and predicting which patients with DME best respond to antivascular endothelial growth factor therapy. SUMMARY: Progress in artificial intelligence and tele-ophthalmology for diabetic retinopathy screening, including artificial intelligence applications in 'real-world settings' and cost-effectiveness studies are summarized. Furthermore, the initial research on the use of artificial intelligence models for diabetic retinopathy risk stratification and management of DME are outlined along with potential future directions. Finally, the need for artificial intelligence adoption within ophthalmology in response to coronavirus disease 2019 is discussed. Digital health solutions such as artificial intelligence and telehealth can facilitate the integration of community, primary and specialist eye care services, optimize the flow of patients within healthcare networks, and improve the efficiency of diabetic retinopathy management.