Non-contact smartphone-based fundus imaging compared to conventional fundus imaging: a low-cost alternative for retinopathy of prematurity screening and documentation.

Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is a frequent cause of treatable childhood blindness. The current dependency of telemedicine-based ROP screening on cost-intensive equipment does not meet the needs in economically disadvantaged regions. Smartphone-based fundus imaging (SBFI) allows for affordable and mobile fundus examination and, therefore, could facilitate cost-effective telemedicine-based ROP screening in low-resources settings. We compared non-contact SBFI and conventional contact fundus imaging (CFI) in terms of feasibility for ROP screening and documentation. Twenty-six eyes were imaged with both SBFI and CFI. Field-of-view was smaller (ratio of diameters, 1:2.5), level of detail was equal, and examination time was longer for SBFI as compared to CFI (109.0 ± 57.8 vs. 75.9 ± 36.3 seconds, p < 0.01). Good agreement with clinical evaluation by indirect funduscopy was achieved for assessment of plus disease and ROP stage for both SBFI (squared Cohen's kappa, 0.88 and 0.81, respectively) and CFI (0.86 and 0.93). Likewise, sensitivity/specificity for detection of plus disease and ROP was high for both SBFI (90%/100% and 88%/93%, respectively) and CFI (80%/100% and 100%/96%). SBFI is a non-contact and low-cost alternative to CFI for ROP screening and documentation that has the potential to considerably improve ROP care in middle- and low-resources settings.

An exclusive human milk diet for very low birth weight newborns-A cost-effectiveness and EVPI study for Germany.

OBJECTIVES: Human milk-based fortifiers have shown a protective effect on major complications for very low birth weight newborns. The current study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of an exclusive human milk diet (EHMD) compared to the current approach using cow's milk-based fortifiers in very low birth weight newborns. METHODS: A decision tree model using the health states of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC), sepsis, NEC + sepsis and no complication was used to calculate the cost-effectiveness of an EHMD. For each health state, bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), retinopathy of prematurity (RoP) and neurodevelopmental problems were included as possible complications; additionally, short-bowel syndrome (SBS) was included as a complication for surgical treatment of NEC. The model was stratified into birth weight categories. Costs for inpatient treatment and long-term consequences were considered from a third party payer perspective for the reference year 2017. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed, including a societal perspective, discounting rate and all input parameter-values. RESULTS: In the base case, the EHMD was estimated to be cost-effective compared to the current nutrition for very low birth weight newborns with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €28,325 per Life-Year-Gained (LYG). From a societal perspective, the ICER is €27,494/LYG using a friction cost approach and €16,112/LYG using a human capital approach. Deterministic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the estimate was robust against changes in the input parameters and probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that the probability EHMD was cost-effective at a threshold of €45,790/LYG was 94.8 percent. CONCLUSION: Adopting EHMD as the standard approach to nutrition is a cost-effective intervention for very low birth weight newborns in Germany.

Regionally Specific Economic Impact of Screening and Treating Retinopathy of Prematurity in Middle-Income Societies in the Philippines.

PURPOSE: To estimate the economic effects of implementing a universal screening and treatment program for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) in the Philippines with the Economic Model for Retinopathy of Prematurity (EcROP). METHODS: The EcROP is a cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit, and cost-utility analysis. Fifty parents of legally blind individuals (aged 3 to 28 years) from three schools for the blind in the Philippines were interviewed to estimate the societal burden of raising a blind child. A decision tree analytic model, with deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis, was used to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (primary outcome) and the incremental monetary benefit (secondary outcome) for implementing an optimal national ROP program, compared to estimates of the current policy. Findings were extrapolated to estimate the national economic benefit of an ideal screening and treatment program. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for a national program over the current policy was strongly favorable to the ideal program for the Philippines and represents an opportunity for substantial societal cost savings. The per-child incremental, annual monetary benefit of a national program over the current policy was $2,627. Extrapolating to the population of children at risk in 1 year showed that the national annual net benefit estimate would be $64,320,692, which is favorable to the current policy. CONCLUSIONS: The EcROP demonstrates that implementing a national ROP screening and treatment program is cost-saving and cost-effective, and would substantially decrease childhood blindness in the Philippines. [J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2019;56(6):388-396.].

Effectiveness and efficiency of tele-expertise for improving access to retinopathy screening among 351 neonates in a secondary care center: An observational, controlled before-after study.

In France, secondary care hospitals encounter difficulties to adhere to retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening guidelines. Our objective was to assess the effectiveness and efficacy of a tele-expertise program for ROP screening in neonatal intensive care units without on-site ophthalmologists. We evaluated the impact of a tele-expertise program funded by the Paris Region Health Authority in a secondary care center general hospital of the Paris Region (CHSF), where there was previously no on-site ophthalmologist. We performed an observational, controlled before-after study, with a university tertiary care center with on-site ophthalmologists (Port-Royal) as the control group. Recruitment and data collection for both periods took place from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 31 2012, and from 1 January 2014 to 31 March 2015. The primary endpoint was the percentage of compliance with screening guidelines, secondary endpoints included pain scores and costs. Over the two periods, at total of 351 infants were recruited in the CHSF. Implementation of the tele-expertise resulted in an absolute +57.3% increase in the proportion of examinations realized in accordance with guidelines (3.8% during the "before" period and 61.1% during the "after" period, p<0.001). As compared with the control group, the proportion of infants appropriately screened improved (57.5% versus 43.1%, p = 0.002); median pain score on the acute pain rating scale for neonates during examination was significantly higher (median score 5.5/10, range [2.5-5.7] versus 2.0/10, range [1.0-3.1], p = 0.002). Screening rates in the control group remained unchanged. The average cost per examination increased from €337 in the "before" period to €353 in the "after period" in the tele-expertise group. The implementation of tele-expertise for ROP screening in the CHSF medical center resulted in a major improvement of access to care with a small cost increase. The issue of pain control during examination with tele-expertise should be further addressed.

Cost analysis of remote telemedicine screening for retinopathy of prematurity.

OBJECTIVE: To compare costs of 2 screening modalities for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP): telemedicine imaging with remote interpretation versus in-person binocular indirect ophthalmoscopy (BIO). DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. PARTICIPANTS: Infants from an existing telemedicine screening program at 2 cities in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We conducted a cost analysis comparison from the perspective of the Ministry of Health. Patient level data was used for the telemedicine group. A hypothetical control group consisted of the minimum number of BIO and interhospital transfers if the existing patients were screened in person. Costs included in-person examinations, transfers, setting up, and ongoing costs of telemedicine screening. Costs were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test and are reported in 2014 Canadian dollars. RESULTS: A total of 102 and 72 infants were screened from Sudbury and Barrie, respectively; 3% and 2% of infants in the telemedicine group were transferred for BIO from Sudbury and Barrie, respectively. All infants in the control group would have required at least one transfer for BIO. The average total cost per eye examination was $4855 ± $5616 and $4540 ± $3129 for the telemedicine group and $19 834 ± $13 814 and $2429 ± $1664 for the control group from Sudbury and Barrie, respectively (p < 0.001). Interhospital transfer cost for the control group was $19 489 ± $13 605 and $2055 ± $1471 compared to $635 ± $3968 and $30 ± $197 for the telemedicine group (p < 0.001) in Sudbury and Barrie, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine appears to be an economically attractive option depending on the location and number of infants screened. This information is useful for planning similar ROP screening programs.

Retinopathy of prematurity: the high cost of screening regional and remote infants.

IMPORTANCE: Demand for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening is increasing for infants born at rural and regional hospitals where the service is not generally available. The health system cost for screening regional/remote infants has not been reported. BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to evaluate the cost of ROP screening at a large centralized tertiary neonatal service for infants from regional/rural hospitals. DESIGN: This is a retrospective study to establish the cost of transferring regional/rural infants to the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital for ROP screening over a 28-month period. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 131 infants were included in this study. METHODS: Individual infant costs were calculated from analysis of clinical and administrative records. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Economic cost of ROP screening for all transfers from regional/rural hospitals to Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital. RESULTS: The average economic cost of ROP screening for this cohort was AUD$5110 per infant screened and the total cost was AUD$669 413. The average cost per infant screened was highest for infants from a regional centre with a population of 75 000 (AUD$14 856 per child), which was also geographically furthest from Brisbane. No infant in this cohort transferred from a regional nursery reached criteria for intervention for ROP by standard guidelines. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Health system costs for ROP screening of remote infants at a centralized hospital are high. Alternative strategies using telemedicine can now be compared with centralized screening.

Bedside ROP screening and telemedicine interpretation integrated to a neonatal transport system: Economic aspects and return on investment analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Peter Cerny Ambulance Service - Premature Eye Rescue Program (PCA-PERP) uses digital retinal imaging (DRI) with remote interpretation in bedside ROP screening, which has advantages over binocular indirect ophthalmoscopy (BIO) in screening of premature newborns. We aimed to demonstrate that PCA-PERP provides good value for the money and to model the cost ramifications of a similar newly launched system. METHODS: As DRI was demonstrated to have high diagnostic performance, only the costs of bedside DRI-based screening were compared to those of traditional transport and BIO-based screening (cost-minimization analysis). The total costs of investment and maintenance were analyzed with micro-costing method. A ten-year analysis time-horizon and service provider's perspective were applied. RESULTS: From the launch of PCA-PERP up to the end of 2014, 3722 bedside examinations were performed in the PCA covered central region of Hungary. From 2009 to 2014, PCA-PERP saved 92,248km and 3633 staff working hours, with an annual nominal cost-savings ranging from 17,435 to 35,140 Euro. The net present value was 127,847 Euro at the end of 2014, with a payback period of 4.1years and an internal rate of return of 20.8%. Our model presented the NPVs of different scenarios with different initial investments, annual number of transports and average transport distances. CONCLUSIONS: PCA-PERP as bedside screening with remote interpretation, when compared to a transport-based screening with BIO, produced better cost-savings from the perspective of the service provider and provided a return on initial investment within five years after the project initiation.

The Economic Model of Retinopathy of Prematurity (EcROP) Screening and Treatment: Mexico and the United States.

PURPOSE: To describe an economic (Ec) model for estimating the impact of screening and treatment for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). DESIGN: EcROP is a cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, and cost-benefit analysis. METHODS: We surveyed caregivers of 52 children at schools for the blind or pediatric eye clinics in Atlanta, Georgia and 43 in Mexico City. A decision analytic model with sensitivity analysis determined the incremental cost-effectiveness (primary outcome) and incremental monetary benefit (secondary outcome) of an ideal (100% screening) national ROP program as compared to estimates of current practice. Direct costs included screening and treatment expenditures. Indirect costs estimated lost productivity of caretaker(s) and blind individuals as determined by face-to-face surveys. Utility and effectiveness were measured in quality-adjusted life years and benefit in US dollars. EcROP includes a sensitivity analysis to assesses the incremental cost-effectiveness and societal impact of ROP screening and treatment within a country or economic region. Estimates are based on evidence-based clinical data and region-specific economic data acquired from direct field survey. RESULTS: In both Mexico and the United States, an ideal national ROP screening and treatment program was highly cost-saving. The incremental net benefit of an ideal ROP program over current practice is $5556 per child ($206 574 333 annually) and $3628 per child ($205 906 959 annually) in Mexico and the United States, respectively. CONCLUSION: EcROP demonstrates that ROP screening and treatment is highly beneficial for quality of life, cost saving, and cost-effectiveness in the United States and Mexico. EcROP can be applied to any country or region to provide data for informed allocation of limited health care resources.

Cost and effects of risk factor guided screening strategies for retinopathy of prematurity for different treatment strategies.

PURPOSE: To investigate the cost and effects of risk factor guided screening strategies for retinopathy of prematurity. METHODS: Clinical data from the Netherlands Retinopathy of Prematurity study (NEDROP study) that included all infants screened for ROP and born in 2009 were used to assess the cost and effects of several screening strategies for ROP using different criteria: (1) gestational age (GA), (2) birthweight (BW), (3) combined GA-BW and (4) combined GA-BW and presence of risk factors. Two treatment strategies were evaluated: the infants actually treated in the NEDROP study (n = 17) and all infants detected with severe ROP (n = 29). RESULTS: The most efficient screening strategy to include all infants treated for both treatment strategies is to screen all infants with a GA of 30 weeks or less and a BW of 1250 g or lower together with infants with a GA of 30-32 weeks and a BW of 1250-1500 g with at least one risk factor. The marginal cost ranged from €43 848 to € 226 914 per additional infant with improved vision. CONCLUSION: The current Dutch guideline may be improved: the same effectiveness can be obtained for lower costs. Releasing the precondition that no infants with severe ROP might be missed will lead to lower costs, but this will also lead to a lower number of infants with improved visual acuity. The costs of detecting all infants with severe ROP seem acceptable for society when the QALY gain and savings from a societal perspective resulting from improved vision are taken into account.

Retinopathy of prematurity screening and treatment cost in Brazil.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the additional cost of incorporating the detection and treatment of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) into neonatal care services of Brazil's Unified Health System (SUS). METHODS: A deterministic decision-tree simulation model was built to estimate the direct costs of screening for and treating ROP in neonatal intensive-care units (NICUs), based on data for 869 preterm infants with birth weight less than 1 500 g examined in six governmental NICUs in the capital city of Rio de Janeiro, where coverage was 52% and 8% of infants were treated. All of the parameters from this study were extrapolated to Brazilian newborn estimates in 2010. Costs of screening and treatment were estimated considering staff, equipment and maintenance, and training based on published data and expert opinion. A budget impact analysis was performed considering the population of preterm newborns, screening coverage, and the incidence of treatable ROP. One- and two-way sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: In Rio de Janeiro, unit costs per newborn were US$ 18 for each examination, US$ 398 per treatment, and US$ 29 for training. The estimated cost of ROP diagnosis and treatment for all at-risk infants NICUs was US$ 80 per infant. The additional cost to the SUS for one year would be US$ 556 640 for a ROP program with 52% coverage, increasing to US$ 856 320 for 80% coverage, and US$ 1.07 million or 100% coverage. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that providing ROP care is affordable within the framework of the SUS in Brazil, and might be feasible elsewhere in Latin America, considering the evidence of the effectiveness of ROP treatment and the social benefits achieved.

Retinopathy of prematurity screening and treatment cost in Brazil / Costo de la detección y el tratamiento de la retinopatía de la prematuridad en el Brasil

OBJECTIVE: To assess the additional cost of incorporating the detection and treatment of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) into neonatal care services of Brazil's Unified Health System (SUS). METHODS: A deterministic decision-tree simulation model was built to estimate the direct costs of screening for and treating ROP in neonatal intensive-care units (NICUs), based on data for 869 preterm infants with birth weight less than 1 500 g examined in six governmental NICUs in the capital city of Rio de Janeiro, where coverage was 52% and 8% of infants were treated. All of the parameters from this study were extrapolated to Brazilian newborn estimates in 2010. Costs of screening and treatment were estimated considering staff, equipment and maintenance, and training based on published data and expert opinion. A budget impact analysis was performed considering the population of preterm newborns, screening coverage, and the incidence of treatable ROP. One- and two-way sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: In Rio de Janeiro, unit costs per newborn were US$ 18 for each examination, US$ 398 per treatment, and US$ 29 for training. The estimated cost of ROP diagnosis and treatment for all at-risk infants NICUs was US$ 80 per infant. The additional cost to the SUS for one year would be US$ 556 640 for a ROP program with 52% coverage, increasing to US$ 856 320 for 80% coverage, and US$ 1.07 million or 100% coverage. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that providing ROP care is affordable within the framework of the SUS in Brazil, and might be feasible elsewhere in Latin America, considering the evidence of the effectiveness of ROP treatment and the social benefits achieved.

OBJETIVO: Evaluar el costo adicional de incorporar la detección y el tratamiento de la retinopatía de la prematuridad (RP) en los servicios de atención neonatal del Sistema Único de Salud (SUS) del Brasil. MÉTODOS: Se estableció un modelo de simulación determinístico en forma de árbol de decisión para calcular los costos directos del tamizaje y el tratamiento de la RP en las unidades de cuidados intensivos neonatales (UCIN), con base en los datos correspondientes a 869 lactantes prematuros con un peso al nacer inferior a 1 500 g examinados en seis UCIN gubernamentales de Rio de Janeiro, capital del estado del mismo nombre, donde la cobertura fue de 52% y se trató a un 7% de los lactantes. Todos los parámetros de este estudio se extrapolaron a los cálculos de recién nacidos brasileños correspondientes al año 2010. Se calcularon los costos de la detección y el tratamiento, teniendo en cuenta el personal, el equipo y la capacitación, con base en los datos publicados y la opinión de los expertos. Se llevó a cabo un análisis de la repercusión presupuestaria considerando la población de recién nacidos prematuros, la cobertura del tamizaje y la incidencia de RP susceptible de tratamiento. Se realizaron análisis de sensibilidad en uno y dos sentidos. RESULTADOS: En Rio de Janeiro, los costos unitarios por recién nacido fueron de US$ 18 por cada examen, US$ 398 por tratamiento y US$ 29 por capacitación. El costo calculado del diagnóstico y el tratamiento de la RP en todos los lactantes en situación de riesgo de las UCIN fue de US$ 80 por lactante. El costo anual adicional para el SUS de un programa de RP con una cobertura de 52% sería de US$ 556 640, y ascendería a US$ 856 320 para una cobertura de 80%, y a US$ 1,07 millones si la cobertura fuera de 100%. CONCLUSIONES: Los resultados de este estudio indican que, teniendo en cuenta los datos probatorios de la eficacia del tratamiento de la RP y los beneficios sociales obtenidos, la prestación de asistencia a la RP es asequible en Brasil en el marco del SUS y podría ser factible en otros lugares de América Latina.

Socioeconomics of retinopathy of prematurity care in the United States.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To elucidate the experience of pediatric ophthalmologists across the United States who care for infants with retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). METHODS: Seven hundred and ten surveys were mailed to U.S. members of the American Association of Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, and 283 (40%) of 710 surveys were completed. Surveys were reviewed and statistical analysis was completed by the authors. RESULTS: There was no uniformity of contract compensation or method for determining the value of ROP care. Almost half of the respondents felt they would generate more income if they did not perform ROP screening. Eighty percent of respondents that were happy with their ROP compensation had a contract for those services. One third of respondents had their malpractice insurance provided by the hospital. Retina specialists performed 40% of inpatient ROP screening and 53% of treatment. Most respondents continued to care for infants with ROP once discharged. CONCLUSIONS: In the United States, there is no uniform experience regarding compensation for ROP care, or a methodology for determining the value of services and coverage of liability insurance. These findings are consistent with previous studies. Lack of uniform compensation and high liability pose a threat to the future of ROP care.

Use of digital retinal imaging in screening for retinopathy of prematurity.

The frequency of premature births is increasing world-wide. This factor, combined with improved survival and revised screening criteria, is resulting in an increased workload in screening for retinopathy of prematurity. Digital retinal imaging is emerging as an important alternative tool for diagnosing retinopathy of prematurity, and its use has even been extended to developing countries. Neonatal nurses and technicians can be trained to use digital imaging devices effectively. This is important in areas that do not have ready access to paediatric ophthalmologists. The ability to transfer images electronically makes it a valuable tool in telemedicine, while the ability to store and retrieve images is also advantageous from a medico-legal perspective. Image analysis software can further improve the accuracy of diagnosis. The main limitation of this technology is its high capital cost.

A novel, low-cost method of enrolling infants at risk for Retinopathy of Prematurity in centers with no screening program: the REDROP study.

PURPOSE: To report the first-year results of the Red Card for Retinopathy of Prematurity (REDROP) study, a low-cost interim strategy to enroll infants into retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening where limited expertise exists, piloted at a multi-specialty general hospital. METHODS: Red "warning" cards were placed alongside green "congratulations" cards above the weighing scale in the neonatal unit. Staff weighing the newborn were instructed to give either one of the cards to each mother depending on the weight of the child (≤ 2000 g, red, and > 2000 g, green). Red cards contained information (tri-lingual) about ROP and the venue of screening. Green cards contained general pediatric eye education and recipients were not called. A portion of the red card with the infant's birth date and mother's contact number was retained and collected weekly by volunteers. Mothers were reminded on the mobile phone to come for ROP screening. Screening and treatment were performed free. RESULTS: During the study period, 224 of 805 (27.8%) infants were born ≤ 2000 g. Of these, 169 (75.4%) survived and were eligible for the red card; 91 (53.8%) received it. Of these, 43 (47.3%) infants completed ROP screening, 14 (32.6%) had some stage ROP, and three (6.9%) required laser treatment. The main reason for the lower turnout for screening was the inability to contact mothers on their provided phone numbers. CONCLUSIONS: REDROP demonstrates the feasibility of this low-cost method of enrolling unscreened infants into a ROP program. The cost of enrolling each infant was less than 5 rupees (US$0.10). Suggested strategies to improve use require multi-center validation.

The societal burden of blindness secondary to retinopathy of prematurity in Lima, Peru.

PURPOSE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of laser treatment for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) in Lima, Peru. DESIGN: A cost-of-illness study (in US dollars) to determine the direct cost of treatment, the indirect lifetime cost of blindness, and the quality-adjusted life years. METHODS: The direct cost of ROP-related treatment was determined by reviewing data retrospectively from a social security sector hospital. The indirect cost was determined using national economic data of Peru published by the Central Information Agency (CIA), including the per capita gross domestic product, the sex-adjusted income distribution, and years spent in the work force. Indirect costs per child that were avoided by treatment were calculated using the known natural history of ROP vs evidence-based treatment. RESULTS: For ROP-related neonatal blindness in Peru, we estimate the total indirect cost saving at $197,753 per child and the direct cost of laser treatment at $2496 per child. The societal lifetime cost saving per child is estimated at $195,257. The mean annual income per educated adult in Peru is $8000 and treating 1 child is equivalent to employing 24 educated Peruvians per year. The generational cost savings for society is approximately $516 million, or the equivalent of 64,500 educated Peruvian work years. CONCLUSIONS: The societal burden of blindness far exceeds the costs of treatment per child. Proper screening and treatment of ROP prevents blindness and leads to substantial cost savings for society. Public health policy in Peru and other middle-income countries should consider financial impact when allocating healthcare resources.

The economics of telemedicine for vitreoretinal diseases.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A literature review was conducted presenting the current data on the economics of telemedicine in vitreoretinal diseases. RECENT FINDINGS: There have been an increasing number of studies evaluating the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine for vitreoretinal diseases. The availability of ophthalmologists able to screen for these conditions is limited. Teleophthalmology has been playing a larger role in screening for diabetic retinopathy, retinopathy of prematurity, and age-related macular degeneration. Many telemedicine programs are currently being investigated and implemented. SUMMARY: Telemedicine is a cost-effective means for screening diabetic retinopathy and retinopathy of prematurity. It can alleviate some of the burden of this growing public health problem. However, the large initial cost associated with beginning a teleophthalmology retinal screening program is a barrier to implementation. Additional studies are needed in the area of telemedicine for age-related macular degeneration.

Cost-utility analysis of screening and laser treatment of retinopathy of prematurity.

PURPOSE: Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is a major cause of lifelong blindness beginning in infancy. Utility analysis is used to describe the effect of illness and medical intervention on an individual's quality of life during the course of a lifetime. In this study, cost-utility analysis is used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of both screening and laser photoablation for ROP. METHODS: Data from 2 neonatal intensive care units were recorded for infants screened and treated for ROP between March 4, 2004, and January 5, 2006. The cost model was developed using procedures classified by Current Procedural Terminology and the costs paid for by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for 2006. Visual acuities were obtained from 10-year post-laser data and from the 10-year post-CRYO-ROP untreated cohort. RESULTS: During the study period, 515 infants received screening and treatment for ROP. They required a mean 3.4 exams per infant; 11.2% received laser photoablation. Mean visual acuities were 0.5 (Snellen 20/40) for laser-treated eyes and 0.20 (Snellen 20/100) for those who did not receive treatment. The cost-effectiveness of screening and laser photoablation of ROP in 2006 is $650/quality-adjusted life years. When discounted 3% per year for the time value of money, the cost is $1,565/ quality-adjusted life years. CONCLUSIONS: The screening and laser photoablation of ROP continue to be extremely cost-effective medical interventions.