Frequency and source of prescription eyewear insurance coverage in Ontario: a repeated population-based cross-sectional study using survey data.

BACKGROUND: Insurance coverage may reduce cost barriers to obtain vision correction. Our aim was to determine the frequency and source of prescription eyewear insurance to understand how Canadians finance optical correction. METHODS: We conducted a repeated population-based cross-sectional study using 2003, 2005 and 2013-2014 Canadian Community Health Survey data from respondents aged 12 years or older from Ontario, Canada. In this group, the cost of prescription eyewear is not covered by the government unless one is registered with a social assistance program or belongs to a specific population. We determined the frequency and source of insurance coverage for prescription eyewear in proportions. We used survey weights provided by Statistics Canada in all analyses to account for sample selection, a complex survey, and adjustments for seasonal effect, poststratification, nonresponse and calibration. We compared unadjusted proportions and adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs) of having insurance. RESULTS: Insurance covered all or part of the costs of prescription eyewear for 62% of Ontarians in all 3 survey years. Of those insured, 84.1%-86.0% had employer-sponsored coverage, 9.0%-10.3% had government-sponsored coverage, and 5.7%-6.8% had private plans. Employer-sponsored coverage remained constant for those in households with postsecondary graduation but decreased significantly for those in households with less than secondary school graduation, from 67.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 63.2%-70.8%) (n = 175 000) in 2005 to 54.6% (95% CI 50.1%-59.2%) (n = 123 500) in 2013-2014. Government-sponsored coverage increased significantly for those in households with less than secondary school graduation, from 29.2% (95% CI 25.5%-32.9%) (n = 76 400) in 2005 to 41.7% (95% CI 37.2%-46.1%) (n = 93 900) in 2013-2014. In 2013-2014, Ontarians in households with less than secondary school graduation were less likely than those with secondary school graduation to report employer-sponsored coverage (adjusted PR 0.79, 95% CI 0.75-0.84) but were more likely to have government-sponsored coverage (adjusted PR 1.27, 95% CI 1.06-1.53). INTERPRETATION: Sixty-two percent of Ontarians had prescription eyewear insurance in 2003, 2005 and 2013-2014; the largest source of insurance was employers, primarily covering those with higher education levels, whereas government-sponsored insurance increased significantly among those with lower education levels. Further research is needed to elucidate barriers to obtaining prescription eyewear and the degree to which affordability impairs access to vision correction.

Fungal Keratitis: A Six-Year Review at a Tertiary Referral Centre.

Background This review reports the epidemiology, laboratory results, treatment regimens and costs of fungal keratitis at a tertiary referral center in Lucerne, Switzerland. Patients and Methods Culture-proven fungal infections between January 2010 and December 2015 were reviewed retrospectively. Results Seventeen patients with a mean age of 52 years were identified. Contact lens wear was the most important risk factor (n = 11) (65 % of all cases), with filamentous fungi being identified as the most common fungus type (n = 10) (91 % of all cases of contact lens-associated fungal keratitis). All non-contact lens-associated fungal infections (n = 6) (35 % of all cases) were related to Candida spp. Six patients (35 %) were treated on an outpatient basis; 11 cases (65 %) required hospitalisation. Systemic voriconazole was the treatment regimen prescribed most often (n = 12) (71 %), followed by topical natamycin 5 % (n = 11) (65 %). Corneal crosslinking and penetrating keratoplasty were required in 4 cases each (24 %). One case ended up in enucleation (6 %). Average costs per case were EUR 15 952 for hospitalised patients if surgical intervention was required, and EUR 7415 if no intervention was performed. Average costs for outpatients were EUR 7079. In a majority of cases, visual acuity could be improved (n = 9) (53 %) or preserved (n = 2) (12 %). Conclusion Despite the relatively low incidence of culture-proven keratitis (17 cases in 6 years), a clear pattern with regard to risk factors and fungus species was noted. In the absence of a gold standard for the treatment of fungal keratitis, the combination of systemic voriconazole and topical natamycin seems to be one of the most commonly used antifungal treatment regimens. The costs of outpatient versus inpatient non-surgical treatment were approximately the same.

Cost of intraocular lens versus contact lens treatment after unilateral congenital cataract surgery in the infant aphakia treatment study at age 5 years.

PURPOSE: To analyze differences in the cost of treatment for infants randomized to primary intraocular lens (IOL) implantation versus optical correction with a contact lens (CL) after unilateral cataract surgery in the Infant Aphakia Treatment Study (IATS). DESIGN: Retrospective cost analysis of a prospective, randomized clinical trial based on Georgia Medicaid reimbursement data as well as actual costs of supplies used during the study, adjusted for inflation. PARTICIPANTS: The IATS is a multicenter (n = 12), randomized clinical trial comparing the optical treatment of aphakia with either primary IOL implantation (n = 57) or CL correction (n = 57) in 114 infants with unilateral congenital cataract. INTERVENTION: One hundred fourteen infants underwent unilateral cataract surgery and were either corrected optically by primary IOL implantation at the time of surgery or were corrected with a CL after surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The mean cost of cataract surgery and all additional surgeries, examinations, and supplies used up to 5 years of age. RESULTS: The 5-year treatment cost of an infant with a unilateral congenital cataract corrected optically with an IOL was $27 090 versus $25 331 for a patient treated with a CL after initial cataract surgery. The total cost of supplies was $3204 in the IOL group versus $7728 in the CL group. CONCLUSIONS: Unilateral cataract surgery in infancy coupled with primary IOL implantation is approximately 7% more expensive than aphakia and CL correction. Patient costs are more than double with CL versus IOL treatment.

[Current quality management situation and administration countermeasure study of enterprises marketing corneal contact lens].

OBJECTIVE: Study the current quality management situation of enterprises marketing corneal contact lens via systemic investigations and explore effective administration countermeasures in the future. METHODS: The quality management indicators of sixty-two corneal contact lens marketing enterprises in Xuhui district of Shanghai were systematically investigated and enterprises of different operation models was compared and analyzed. RESULTS: Wholesale enterprises and retail chain enterprises are apparently better than independent enterprises almost in all facets. CONCLUSION: Facilitate market accession of corneal contact lens marketing enterprises, encourage the business model of retail chain, enhance supervision of corneal contact lens marketing enterprises, especially independent franchisors.

Cost of intraocular lens versus contact lens treatment after unilateral congenital cataract surgery: retrospective analysis at age 1 year.

PURPOSE: To describe the differences in treatment costs for infants randomized to contact lens correction versus primary intraocular lens (IOL) implantation after unilateral cataract surgery in the Infant Aphakia Treatment Study (IATS). DESIGN: Retrospective cost analysis of a prospective, randomized clinical trial based on Georgia Medicaid data and the actual costs of supplies used. PARTICIPANTS: The IATS is a randomized, multicenter (n=12) clinical trial comparing treatment of aphakia with a primary IOL or contact lens in 114 infants with unilateral congenital cataract. INTERVENTION: Infants underwent cataract surgery with or without placement of an IOL. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The mean cost of cataract surgery and all additional surgeries, examinations, and supplies used up to 12 months of age. RESULTS: The mean cost of treatment for a unilateral congenital cataract with primary IOL implantation was $14 752 versus $10 726 with contact lens correction. The initial cataract surgery accounted for approximately 50% of the treatment costs for both groups. Contact lens costs accounted for 15% ($1600/patient) in the aphakic group, whereas glasses costs represented only 4% ($535/patient) in the IOL group. The increased costs in the IOL group were primarily due to the higher cost of cataract surgery in this group ($7302 vs. $5357) and the cost of additional operations. CONCLUSIONS: For IATS patients up to 12 months of age, cataract surgery coupled with IOL implantation and spectacle correction was 37.5% (∼$4000) more expensive than cataract surgery coupled with contact lens correction. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

Monitoring the effect of mild ischemia with a built-in light-emitting diode contact lens electrode and a low-cost custom-made apparatus.

Electroretinography (ERG) is widely used in clinical work and research to assess the retinal function. We evaluated an easy to build ERG setup adapted for small animals comprising two contact lens electrodes with a built-in light-emitting diode and a custom-made amplification system. The system's sensitivity was tested by monitoring ERG in albino rat eyes subjected to mild ischemia. Flash ERG was recorded by two contact lens electrodes positioned on the rat's corneas and used alternately as test or reference. The a- and b-wave amplitudes, a-wave latency, b-wave implicit time and oscillatory potentials (OPs) were analyzed. Ischemia was achieved by elevating the intraocular pressure in the eye's anterior chamber. ERG was recorded on post-ischemia (PI) days -1, 1, 3 and 7. Morphological changes were analyzed on hematoxylin/eosin stained 5 µm sections of control 7d PI retinas. In control eyes, ERG exhibited a pattern similar to a standard recording. Retinas subjected to mild ischemia preserved ordered layered morphology, exhibiting approximately 30% loss of ganglion cells and no changes in gross morphology. By day 3 PI, ischemia caused an increase in the a-wave amplitude (from 34.9 ± 2.7 to 45.4 ± 4.3 µV), a decrease in the b-wave amplitude (from 248 ± 13 to 162 ± 8 µV), an increase in a-wave latency (from 11.1 ± 0.3 to 17.3 ± 1.4 ms) and b-wave implicit time (from 81.0 ± 1.6 to 90.0 ± 2.5 ms), and attenuation of OPs. The described setup proved sensitive and reliable for evaluating subtle changes in the retinal function in small animals.

A 'cost-per-wear' model based on contact lens replacement frequency.

PURPOSE: The aim was to construct and advise on the use of a cost-per-wear model based on contact lens replacement frequency, to form an equitable basis for cost comparison. METHODS: The annual cost of professional fees, contact lenses and solutions when wearing daily, two-weekly and monthly replacement contact lenses is determined in the context of the Australian market for spherical, toric and multifocal prescription types. This annual cost is divided by the number of times lenses are worn per year, resulting in a 'cost-per-wear'. The model is presented graphically as the cost-per-wear versus the number of times lenses are worn each week for daily replacement and reusable (two-weekly and monthly replacement) lenses. RESULTS: The cost-per-wear for two-weekly and monthly replacement spherical lenses is almost identical but decreases with increasing frequency of wear. The cost-per-wear of daily replacement spherical lenses is lower than for reusable spherical lenses, when worn from one to four days per week but higher when worn six or seven days per week. The point at which the cost-per-wear is virtually the same for all three spherical lens replacement frequencies (approximately AUD$3.00) is five days of lens wear per week. A similar but upwardly displaced (higher cost) pattern is observed for toric lenses, with the cross-over point occurring between three and four days of wear per week (AUD$4.80). Multifocal lenses have the highest price, with cross-over points for daily versus two-weekly replacement lenses at between four and five days of wear per week (AUD$5.00) and for daily versus monthly replacement lenses at three days per week (AUD$5.50). CONCLUSIONS: This cost-per-wear model can be used to assist practitioners and patients in making an informed decision in relation to the cost of contact lens wear as one of many considerations that must be taken into account when deciding on the most suitable lens replacement modality.

Economic appraisal of the Boston Ocular Surface Prosthesis.

PURPOSE: To perform an economic appraisal of the Boston Ocular Surface Prosthesis in patients with corneal ectasia, irregular astigmatism, or ocular surface disease. DESIGN: Cost, incremental cost-effectiveness, and benefit-cost analyses in a prospective observational study. METHODS: The effects of this scleral lens on visual functioning were measured in 69 patients who received the prosthesis in 2006 and were reassessed 6 months after fitting the prosthesis. Benefits, based on improvements in visual functioning, were converted to quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and economic values were derived using results from published studies. Costs were estimated from the provider organization's 2006 operating financial statement with additions for donated resources and future scale-up. RESULTS: Mean scores on a 100-point visual functioning questionnaire (VFQ-25) improved from 57.0 to 77.8 (P < .0001). On average, each fitted patient cost $11,841 ($6001 for clinical services and $5840 to produce the prosthesis). Patients' quality of life improved by 0.10 QALYs per year. Assuming that benefits persist for an average of 5 years, the lifetime gain was 0.48 QALYs; the average cost-effectiveness of the prosthesis was $24,900 per QALY (95% confidence interval $19,100 to $29,600), and the average benefit-cost ratio was 4.0 to 1. In patients with the lowest baseline scores (average VFQ score 38.6), results were even more favorable: cost-effectiveness $17,100 per QALY and benefit-cost ratio 5.6 to 1. CONCLUSIONS: The Boston Ocular Surface Prosthesis is cost-effective and cost beneficial in patients with severely compromised visual function attributable to ectasia, irregular astigmatism, or ocular surface disease.

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.

[Efficacy and low cost in keratoconus treatment with rigid gas-permeable contact lens]. / Eficácia e baixo custo no tratamento do ceratocone com o uso de lentes de contato rígidas gás-permeáveis.

PURPOSE: To study the efficacy of rigid gas-permeable contact lens (RGPCL) fitting in keratoconus patients and to determine treatment costs. METHODS: The records of 126 patients treated at the Hospital das Clínicas de Ribeirão Preto from January 2001 to June 2002 were retrospectively studied. Information about sex, age and treated eyes was collected. Visual acuity (VA) with and without correction was measured and plotted against corneal base curve (K) and toricity. Average price of the lenses was calculated. RESULTS: Fitting rigid gas-permeable contact lens was successful in 86.18% of the patients, resulting in VA=0.8 in 40.00% of them. Visual acuity improvement was observed in patients with steep base curve and in patients with high corneal toricity. Age of most patients ranged from 15 to 45 years; 60.31% of them were female. Corneal transplantation was indicated in 11.24% of the cases. Cost of each lens averaged R$ 40.00 (USD 13.00). CONCLUSION: Rigid gas-permeable contact lens proved to be an efficient, low-cost resource for improving visual acuity in most of the treated patients.

Eficácia e baixo custo no tratamento do ceratocone com o uso de lentes de contato rígidas gás-permeáveis / Efficacy and low cost in keratoconus treatment with rigid gas-permeable contact lens

OBJETIVO: Avaliar a eficácia da adaptação de lente de contato rígida gás-permeável (LCRGP) em pacientes com ceratocone e os custos do tratamento. MÉTODOS: Realizou-se análise retrospectiva dos prontuários de 126 pacientes atendidos no Ambulatório de Lente de Contato do Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto no período de janeiro de 2001 a junho de 2002. Foram analisados sexo, idade e número de olhos adaptados. A acuidade visual sem e com correção foi relacionada à curva-base em K (meridiano mais plano da córnea) do paciente e à diferença ceratométrica dos meridianos corneanos. Determinou-se o custo unitário médio das lentes fornecidas aos pacientes. RESULTADOS: Obteve-se sucesso na adaptação de lente de contato rígida gás-permeável em 86,19 por cento dos casos, com visão = 0,8 em 40,00 por cento dos pacientes adaptados. Houve melhora visual tanto nos pacientes com curva-base elevada quanto naqueles que apresentavam alta diferença ceratométrica entre os meridianos corneanos. A faixa etária mais acometida encontrou-se entre 15 e 45 anos, sendo 60,31 por cento dos pacientes do sexo feminino. A proporção de indicação de transplante de córnea foi de 11,42 por cento. O custo unitário médio da lente foi de R$ 40,00. CONCLUSAO: A adaptação proporcionou acentuada melhora visual na maioria dos pacientes portadores de ceratocone a custo relativamente baixo.

Contact lenses for the treatment of pediatric cataracts.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the experiences, attitudes, and perceptions of the caregivers of children with cataracts who were visually rehabilitated with contact lenses. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred twenty-three caregivers of children <8.1 years old treated for unilateral and bilateral cataracts at one pediatric hospital. DESIGN: Survey by questionnaire. INTERVENTION: Primary caregivers were asked to complete an anonymous questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Caregiver responses to questions assessing background and demographic and clinical information, as well as perceptions, attitudes, levels of compliance, and anxiety with respect to treatment, were reviewed. Caregivers were also asked to choose between aphakic rehabilitation with contact lenses, aphakic glasses, or intraocular lenses, given various hypothetical scenarios differing in regard to their final visual prognosis, risks of treatment complications, and cost. RESULTS: The response rate was 82.9%. Absolute average stress levels for contact lens use were 1.36 +/- 1.79 and 0.79 +/- 1.48 (scale, 0-5) for insertion and removal, respectively, compared with 4.03 +/- 1.64 and 2.40 +/- 1.92 for cataract surgery and patching therapy, respectively. Although average paired initial resistance to treatment (RT) levels for contact lens insertion and removal on a scale of 0 to 3 were high (2.09 +/- 1.15) and moderate (1.63 +/- 1.20), respectively, final RT levels were significantly lower (1.09 +/- 1.14 and 0.66 +/- 1.07, respectively; P < 0.0001). The vast majority of caregivers chose contact lens use in hypothetical scenarios that depicted realistic expectations for other forms of aphakic rehabilitation. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, contact lenses seemed to be well tolerated by most patients, as assessed by caregivers. Although initial resistance to contact lens use is high, this decreases with time. Relative to other events in the treatment of pediatric cataracts, contact lens use is not a major stressor for most caregivers and patients. This study supports the notion that contact lenses should continue to receive serious consideration as a treatment option for pediatric cataracts.