Search

Purpose: To produce an economic comparison of the iStent ab interno trabecular microbypass implant accompanying cataract surgery and selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) as first-line treatment versus topical medications for open-angle glaucoma in New Zealand in 2016., Methods: The current annual costs of 19 available fully subsidised topical glaucoma medications by Pharmaceutical Management Agency (Pharmac) in 2016 were identified. Adjustments for pharmacist prescribing charges and previously described wastage levels were applied. The costs to perform iStent implantation and the cost to perform SLT were obtained from the local distributors, with the latter taking into account staff and consumable cost. Procedure costs divided by eye drops' cost produced a break-even level in equivalent years of eye drops use., Results: The range of annual eye drop cost was NZD$42.25 to NZD$485.11, with an average of NZD$144.81. Comparison of annual eye drop cost with iStent cost revealed 3 of 19 (15.8%) drops breaking even within 5 years, 9 of 19 (47.3%) within 10 years, and 12 of 19 (63.2%) within 15 years. The cost of bilateral SLT performed by a consultant was NZD$102.30 (breaking even in 0.71 years). The equivalent cost for a registrar was NZD$97.59 (breaking even in 0.67 years)., Conclusion: Economically, the iStent would appear to be a reasonably cost-effective treatment for glaucoma patients undergoing cataract surgery in a public healthcare setting in New Zealand, particularly for those using more expensive topical glaucoma medications, whilst SLT appears to be a worthwhile consideration as a first-line treatment for glaucoma in New Zealand.

Importance: Medical and surgical interventions for glaucoma are effective only if they are affordable to patients. Little is known about how affordable glaucoma interventions are in developing and developed countries., Objective: To compare the prices of topical glaucoma medications, laser trabeculoplasty, and trabeculectomy relative with median annual household income (MA-HHI) for countries worldwide., Design, Setting and Participants: Cross-sectional observational study. For each country, we obtained prices for glaucoma medications, laser trabeculoplasty, and trabeculectomy using government pricing data, drug databases, physician fee schedules, academic publications, and communications with local ophthalmologists. Prices were adjusted for purchasing power parity and inflation to 2016 US dollars, and annual therapy prices were examined relative to the MA-HHI. Interventions costing less than 2.5% of the MA-HHI were considered affordable., Main Outcomes and Measures: Daily cost for topical glaucoma medications, cost of annual therapy with glaucoma medications, laser trabeculoplasty, and trabeculectomy relative to MA-HHI in each country., Results: Data were obtained from 38 countries, including 17 developed countries and 21 developing countries, as classified by the World Economic Outlook. We observed considerable variability in intervention prices compared with MA-HHI across the countries and across interventions, ranging from 0.1% to 5% of MA-HHI for timolol, 0.1% to 27% for latanoprost, 0.2% to 17% for laser trabeculoplasty, and 0.3% to 42% for trabeculectomy. Timolol was the most affordable medication in all countries studied and was 2.5% or more of MA-HHI in only 2 countries (5%). The annual cost of latanoprost was 2.5% or more of MA-HHI in 15 countries (41%) (15 developing countries [75%] and no developed countries). The cost of laser trabeculoplasty was 2.5% or more of the MA-HHI in 15 countries (44%) (11 developing countries [65%] and 4 developed countries [24%]). The cost of trabeculectomy was 2.5% or more of the MA-HHI in 28 countries (78%) (18 developing countries [95%] and 10 developed countries [59%]). In 18 countries (53%), laser trabeculoplasty cost less than a 3-year latanoprost supply., Conclusions and Relevance: For many patients worldwide, the costs of medical, laser, and incisional surgical interventions were 2.5% or more of the MA-HHI. Successfully reducing global blindness from glaucoma requires addressing multiple contributing factors, including making glaucoma interventions more affordable.

Background: Presentation with advanced glaucoma is the major risk factor for lifetime blindness. Effective intervention at diagnosis is expected to minimise risk of further visual loss in this group of patients., Aim: To compare clinical and cost-effectiveness of primary medical management compared with primary surgery for people presenting with advanced open-angle glaucoma (OAG)., Methods: Design : A prospective, pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT)., Setting: Twenty-seven UK hospital eye services., Participants: Four hundred and forty patients presenting with advanced OAG, according to the Hodapp-Parish-Anderson classification of visual field loss., Intervention: Participants will be randomised to medical treatment or augmented trabeculectomy (1:1 allocation minimised by centre and presence of advanced disease in both eyes)., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome is vision-related quality of life measured by the National Eye Institute-Visual Function Questionnaire-25 at 24 months. Secondary outcomes include generic EQ-5D-5L, Health Utility Index-3 and glaucoma-related health status (Glaucoma Utility Index), patient experience, visual field measured by mean deviation value, logarithm of the mean angle of resolution visual acuity, intraocular pressure, adverse events, standards for driving and eligibility for blind certification. Incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) based on EQ-5D-5L and glaucoma profile instrument will be estimated., Results: The study will report the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of medical treatment against augmented trabeculectomy in patients presenting with advanced glaucoma in terms of patient-reported health and visual function, clinical outcomes and incremental cost per QALY at 2 years., Conclusions: Treatment of Advanced Glaucoma Study will be the first RCT reporting outcomes from the perspective of those with advanced glaucoma., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN56878850, Pre-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: TAGS is funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) programme (project number 12/35/38). JMB, GM, AM and JMS report grants from NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme during the conduct of the study. LV reports grants from NIHR HTA Programme during the conduct of the study; and membership of the NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme and a director of the NIHR Research Design Service. JN reports grants from NIHR HTA during the conduct of the study; personal fees from NIHR Editors Board, other from NIHR HTA General Board, outside the submitted work., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Aim: Patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) whose intraocular pressure is not adequately controlled by one medication have several treatment options in the US. This analysis evaluated direct costs of unilateral eye treatment with two trabecular micro-bypass stents (two iStents) compared to selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) or medications only., Materials and Methods: A population-based, annual state-transition, probabilistic, cost-of-care model was used to assess OAG-related costs over 5 years. Patients were modeled to initiate treatment in year zero with two iStents, SLT, or medications only. In years 1-5, patients could remain on initial treatment or move to another treatment option(s), or filtration surgery. Treatment strategy change probabilities were identified by a clinician panel. Direct costs were included for drugs, procedures, and complications., Results: The projected average cumulative cost at 5 years was lower in the two-stent treatment arm ($4,420) compared to the SLT arm ($4,730) or medications-only arm ($6,217). Initial year-zero costs were higher with two iStents ($2,810) than with SLT ($842) or medications only ($996). Average marginal annual costs in years 1-5 were $322 for two iStents, $777 for SLT, and $1,044 for medications only. The cumulative cost differences between two iStents vs SLT or medications only decreased over time, with breakeven by 5 or 3 years post-initiation, respectively. By year 5, cumulative savings with two iStents over SLT or medications only was $309 or $1,797, respectively., Limitations: This analysis relies on clinical expert panel opinion and would benefit from real-world evidence on use of multiple procedures and treatment switching after two-stent treatment, SLT, or polypharmaceutical initial approaches., Conclusions: Despite higher costs in year zero, annual costs thereafter were lowest in the two-stent treatment arm. Two-stent treatment may reduce OAG-related health resource use, leading to direct savings, especially over medications only or at longer time horizons.

Background: Glaucoma is the leading cause of irreversible blindness in the world. Estimated to affect 60 million people worldwide, this figure is expected to rise to 80 million by 2020. Untreated, glaucoma leads to visual decay and eventually to blindness, and can significantly reduce quality of life. First-line treatment in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma and exfoliative glaucoma is topical medical therapy with ocular hypotensives as eye drops. However, eye drops have several disadvantages including cost, possible local and systemic side effects, and adherence and perseverance issues. Randomised controlled trials have demonstrated that selective laser trabeculoplasty is equally as effective in lowering intraocular pressure as eye drops. However, the impact of these two treatment modalities from the patient and economic perspectives has not been adequately determined. Thus, it remains unclear whether topical medical therapy or selective laser trabeculoplasty should be recommended as first-line treatment for glaucoma., Methods/design: This protocol describes an international, multi-centre, randomised controlled trial to determine the optimum first-line therapy for people with primary open-angle glaucoma and exfoliative glaucoma. This study will compare the effect of selective laser trabeculoplasty and topical medication with respect to patients' generic and glaucoma-specific quality of life. The trial will also provide a detailed cost-effectiveness analysis and compare the clinical effectiveness with respect to the degree of intraocular pressure lowering and rates of treatment failure. Research coordinators in each centre will identify and recruit previously untreated patients with primary open-angle glaucoma and exfoliative glaucoma. Those who meet the eligibility criteria will be invited to enter a randomised controlled trial with either selective laser trabeculoplasty or topical ocular hypotensive therapy, according to a stepped regimen. Outcome assessment will be measured at 6 weeks and at 6, 12, and 24 months post-treatment. Regular clinic follow-ups will continue as clinically indicated between study outcome visits., Discussion: The Glaucoma Initial Treatment Study is the first multi-centred RCT to determine the optimum first-line therapy for people with glaucoma. Our trial will have an unprecedented capacity to meaningfully transform the treatment and management of glaucoma in Australia and overseas., Trial Registration: ACTRN12611000720910; Date registered: 11 July 2011.

Importance: The Tube vs Trabeculectomy Trial (TVT) found that the 350-mm2 Baerveldt implant (tube) and trabeculectomy with mitomycin may be similarly effective in lowering intraocular pressure in primary open-angle glaucoma. However, to date, there are no published long-term clinical data on the cost-effectiveness of trabeculectomy with mitomycin vs tube insertion., Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of these procedures compared with maximal medical treatment., Design, Setting, and Participants: We used the Markov cohort model with a 5-year time horizon to study a hypothetical cohort of 100 000 patients who required glaucoma surgery., Main Outcomes and Measures: Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained, costs from the societal perspective, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of medical treatment, trabeculectomy, and tube insertion. Costs were identified from Medicare Current Procedural Terminology and Ambulatory Payment Classification reimbursement codes and Red Book medication costs. The QALYs were based on visual field and visual acuity outcomes. The hypothetical societal limit to resources was included using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000 per QALY. Costs and utilities were discounted at 3% per year. Uncertainty was assessed using deterministic sensitivity analyses., Results: The mean costs for medical treatment, trabeculectomy, and tube insertion were $6172, $7872 and $10 075, respectively; these amounts resulted in a cost difference of $1700 (95% CI, $1644-$1770) for medical treatment vs trabeculectomy, $3904 (95% CI, $3858-$3953) for medical treatment vs tube insertion, and $2203 (95% CI, $2121-$2261) for trabeculectomy vs tube insertion. The mean 5-year probability of blindness was 4% for both surgical procedures and 15% for medical treatment. The utility gained after medical treatment, trabeculectomy, and tube insertion was 3.10, 3.30, and 3.38 QALYs, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $8289 per QALY for trabeculectomy vs medical treatment, $13 896 per QALY for tube insertion vs medical treatment, and $29 055 per QALY for tube insertion vs trabeculectomy. The cost-effectiveness of each surgical procedure was most sensitive to early and late surgical failure rates and was minimally affected by adverse events, rates of visual field progression, or medication costs., Conclusions and Relevance: Assuming a willingness to pay of $50 000 per QALY, trabeculectomy and tube insertion are cost-effective compared with medical treatment alone. Trabeculectomy, however, is cost-effective at a substantially lower cost per QALY compared with tube insertion. More research is necessary to reliably account for patient preferences between the 2 operations.

Purpose: To compare the direct cost of treating glaucoma patients with Trabectome, iStent, and endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation (ECP) versus topical medications in Ontario, Canada. Costs are projected over a 6-year period, and presented on a per-patient level from the perspective of the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP)., Methods: The per-bottle cost of each medication was obtained from the 2011 Ontario Drug Benefit (ODB) formulary. A wastage adjustment fee was added to the cost, as was a pharmacy markup, and an ODB dispensing fee. Previously published medication prescription rates were used to determine the frequency with which each medication is prescribed. We estimated the overall cost by taking a weighted average of the cost of each class of glaucoma medications.The cost of each glaucoma device was determined by contacting local distributors. We then added the cost of disposables used during surgery (viscoelastic and keratome) to the cost of each procedure. Start-up costs for each device and surgeons' fees were excluded from the overall cost., Results: At 6 years, treatment with the Trabectome offered a cumulative cost savings of $279.23, $1572.55, and $2424.71 per patient versus monodrug, bidrug, and tridrug therapy, respectively. A cumulative cost difference of -$20.77, $1272.55, and $2124.71 per patient were found when comparing iStent versus monodrug, bidrug, and tridrug therapy, respectively. Treatment with ECP yielded a cost savings of $779.23, $2072.55, and $2924.71 per patient versus monodrug, bidrug, and tridrug therapy, respectively., Conclusions: Over a projected period of 6 years, the Trabectome, iStent, and ECP may all offer a modest cost savings to OHIP versus the cost of glaucoma medication. Further analysis of direct and indirect costs to patients as well as quality of life assessments will help further delineate the role of these treatments in the glaucoma treatment paradigm.

Purpose: To assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of treating normal tension glaucoma (NTG)., Methods: A Markov decision-analytic health model was developed to determine the cost-effectiveness of treating NTG with IOP lowering therapy to prevent progressive visual field loss. Transitional probabilities were derived from the Collaborative Normal Tension Glaucoma Study and cost data obtained from the literature and the Medicare fee schedule. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) of treating all patients with NTG and treating selected individuals with risk factors for disease progression were determined using Monte Carlo simulation. Sensitivity analyses were performed by varying the cost of consultations, medications, laser/surgery, and adjusting utility loss from progressed states., Results: The ICER of treating all patients with NTG over a 10-year period was United States (US) $34,225 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The ICER would be reduced when treatment was offered selectively to those with risk factors for disease progression. The ICER for treating NTG patients with disc hemorrhage, migraine, and those who were female were US $24,350, US $25,533, and US $27,000 per QALY, respectively. The cost-effectiveness of treating all NTG patients in this model was sensitive to cost fluctuation of medications, choice of utility score associated with disease progression, and insensitive to cost of consultations and laser/surgery., Conclusions: It is cost-effective, in the long-term, to offer IOP lowering therapy, aiming for a 30% reduction from the baseline, to all NTG patients. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of treating all patients with normal tension glaucoma over a 10-year period was $34,225 per quality-adjusted life year and should be offered to individuals in need.

Objective: To determine the most cost-effective treatment option for patients with newly diagnosed mild open-angle glaucoma: observation only, treatment with generic topical prostaglandin analogs (PGAs), or treatment with laser trabeculoplasty (LTP)., Methods: Using a Markov model with a 25-year horizon, we compared the incremental cost-effectiveness of treating newly diagnosed mild open-angle glaucoma with PGAs, LTP, or observation only., Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness of LTP over no treatment is $16,824 per quality-adjusted life year. By comparison, the incremental cost-effectiveness of PGAs over no treatment is $14,179 per quality-adjusted life year, and they provide greater health-related quality of life relative to LTP. If PGAs are 25% less effective owing to poor patient adherence, LTP can confer greater value., Conclusions: Prostaglandin analogs and LTP are both cost-effective options for the management of newly diagnosed mild open-angle glaucoma. Assuming optimal medication adherence, PGAs confer greater value compared with LTP. However, when assuming more realistic levels of medication adherence (making them 25% less effective than the documented effectiveness reported in clinical trials), at current prices for PGAs, LTP may be a more cost-effective alternative.

Background: The projected 6-year cost comparison of primary selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) versus primary medical therapy in the treatment of open-angle glaucoma for Ontario patients aged 65 years or more is presented. Costs are taken from the perspective of the Ontario Health Insurance Plan at a per-patient level., Methods: The cost of each medication was obtained from the 2003 Ontario Drug Benefits formulary. The average annual cost of medications was determined by estimating the provincial prescription rate of glaucoma medications, with reference to both a volume-per-bottle study of these drugs and a study of pharmacy claims reports. A representative provincial prescription rate was calculated by reviewing 707 patient charts selected randomly from 5 ophthalmologic practices across Ontario. Medication therapies were categorized into mono-, bi-, and tri-drug therapy groups. The cost of SLT was analyzed under the following 2 scenarios. SLT rep 2y assumed a duration of 2 years before repeat SLT was necessary. SLT rep 3y assumed a duration of 3 years before repeat SLT was necessary. Bilateral 180 degrees SLT treatment and repeatability of SLT was assumed. The cost of surgery for patients who fail SLT or medical therapy was not accounted for in this study nor was the cost of patients who required medical therapy in conjunction with SLT., Results: In the SLT rep 2y scenario, the use of primary SLT over mono-, bi-, and tri-drug therapy produced a 6-year cumulative cost savings of 206.54 dollars, 1668.64 dollars, and 2992.67 dollars per patient, respectively. In the SLT rep 3y scenario, the use of primary SLT over mono-, bi-, and tri-drug therapy produced a 6-year cumulative cost savings of 580.52 dollars, 2042.82 dollars, and 3366.65 dollars per patient, respectively., Interpretation: Our findings suggest that SLT as primary therapy, at a per-patient level, offers a modest potential cost saving over primary medical therapy in the management of open-angle glaucoma for Ontario patients aged 65 years or more.