RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the economic impact for the society, generated as a consequence of the onset of loss of vision and irreversible legal blindness, for the main ophthalmologic diseases in Spain: glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy (DR), diabetic macular edema (DME), age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and high myopia (HM). METHODS: A cost analysis model was developed to estimate the economic burden of glaucoma, DR, DME, AMD and HM over a 10-year time horizon (2021-2030), from a societal perspective in Spain. The epidemiological and economic parameters used in the model were obtained through a literature review. Prevalence, incidence, and progression stages were used to establish the epidemiological flows. Annual costs per patient from publications were included and classified into direct healthcare, direct non-healthcare and indirect costs. Costs from other countries were converted based on purchasing-power-parity (EUR, PPP). Epidemiological parameters about population and cost results were validated by a panel of experts. All costs were adjusted to euros, 2021 (, 2021), and using the Consumer Price Index (CPI) of the last 10 years, extrapolated to 2030 euros (, 2030). RESULTS: It was estimated that the total population of patients with the main diseases pathologies (glaucoma, DR, DME, AMD and HM) will increase to 7.99 million patients by 2030, representing an increase of 103%. The total cost by 2030 of all pathologies would amount to 99.8 billion euros. Direct non-healthcare costs account for the largest item (44%), followed by loss of productivity costs (38%), and direct healthcare costs (18%). The pathologies with the highest cumulative costs will be glaucoma (33.6 billion) and DME (19.8 billion).The greatest increment costs compared to 2021 will likely be generated by pathologies related to diabetes mellitus, such as DR (703%) and DME (317%). CONCLUSIONS: Knowing the costs associated with the pathologies that generate loss of vision and irreversible legal blindness is essential to understand the socioeconomic impact associated with these pathologies. Furthermore, the high cost of treating these diseases makes necessary to coordinate efforts between administrations, together with the support of patient associations, to meet their needs.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The clinical and economic management of retinal diseases has become more complex following the introduction of new intravitreal treatments. Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) offers the potential to overcome the challenges associated with traditional decision-making tools. OBJECTIVES: A MCDA to determine the most relevant criteria to decision-making in the management of diabetic macular edema (DME) based on the perspectives of multiple stakeholders in Spain was developed. This MCDA was termed the MULTIDEX-EMD study. METHODS: Nineteen stakeholders (7 physicians, 4 pharmacists, 5 health authorities and health management experts, 1 psychologist, and 2 patient representatives) participated in this three-phase project. In phase A, an advisory board defined all of the criteria that could influence DME treatment decision-making. These criteria were then screened using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) (phase B). Next, a multinomial logit model was fitted by applying the backward elimination algorithm (relevant criteria: p value < 0.05). Finally, the results were discussed in a deliberative process (phase C). RESULTS: Thirty-one criteria were initially defined (phase A) and grouped into 5 categories: efficacy/effectiveness, safety, organizational and economic impact, patient-reported outcomes, and other therapeutic features. The DCE results (phase B) showed that 10 criteria were relevant to the decision-making process for a 50- to 65-year-old DME patient: mean change in best corrected visual acuity (p value < 0.001), percentage of patients with an improvement of ≥ 15 letters (p value < 0.001), effect duration per administration (p value = 0.008), retinal detachment (p value < 0.001), endophthalmitis (p value = 0.012), myocardial infarction (p value < 0.001), intravitreal hemorrhage (p value = 0.021), annual treatment cost per patient (p value = 0.001), health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (p value = 0.004), and disability level (p value = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: From a multi-stakeholder perspective, the selection of an appropriate treatment for DME patients should guarantee patient safety and maximize the visual acuity improvement and treatment effect duration. It should also contribute to system sustainability by being affordable, it should have a positive impact on HRQoL, and it should prevent disability.