Cataract surgery and effectiveness. 1. Variation in costs between different providers of cataract surgery

The economics of vision impairment and its leading causes: A systematic review

Vision impairment (VI) can have wide ranging economic impact on individuals, households, and health systems. The aim of this systematic review was to describe and summarise the costs associated with VI and its major causes. We searched MEDLINE (16 November 2019), National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and the Health Technology Assessment database (12 December 2019) for partial or full economic evaluation studies, published between 1 January 2000 and the search dates, reporting cost data for participants with VI due to an unspecified cause or one of the seven leading causes globally: cataract, uncorrected refractive error, diabetic retinopathy, glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration, corneal opacity, trachoma. The search was repeated on 20 January 2022 to identify studies published since our initial search. Included studies were quality appraised using the British Medical Journal Checklist for economic submissions adapted for cost of illness studies. Results were synthesized in a structured narrative. Of the 138 included studies, 38 reported cost estimates for VI due to an unspecified cause and 100 reported costs for one of the leading causes. These 138 studies provided 155 regional cost estimates. Fourteen studies reported global data; 103/155 (66%) regional estimates were from high-income countries. Costs were most commonly reported using a societal (n = 48) or healthcare system perspective (n = 25). Most studies included only a limited number of cost components. Large variations in methodology and reporting across studies meant cost estimates varied considerably. The average quality assessment score was 78% (range 35-100%); the most common weaknesses were the lack of sensitivity analysis and insufficient disaggregation of costs. There was substantial variation across studies in average treatment costs per patient for most conditions, including refractive error correction (range $12-$201 ppp), cataract surgery (range $54-$3654 ppp), glaucoma (range $351-$1354 ppp) and AMD (range $2209-$7524 ppp). Future cost estimates of the economic burden of VI and its major causes will be improved by the development and adoption of a reference case for eye health. This could then be used in regular studies, particularly in countries with data gaps, including low- and middle-income countries in Asia, Eastern Europe, Oceania, Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa.

Immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery and its relevance in COVID-19 era

Immediately sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS) involves performing phacoemulsification with intraocular lens implantation in both the eyes of a patient, sequentially in the same operative sitting. There are well-documented advantages in terms of quicker visual rehabilitation and reduced costs. The risk of bilateral simultaneous endophthalmitis and bilateral blindness is now recognized to be minuscule with the advent of intracameral antibiotics and modern management of endophthalmitis. Refractive surprises are rare for normal eyes and with the use of optical biometry. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, all elective surgeries were stopped. This has resulted in a large backlog of deferred cataract surgeries. Now more than ever before, we should consider ISBCS as an excellent alternative to delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery in the right hospital or surgical setting. In the age of COVID-19, it can help to decrease surgical scheduling and follow-up visits. The one change in practice that could have the most significant benefit in reducing infection exposure risk is ISBCS.

Follow-Up After Cataract Surgery - Comparison of the Practice in Two Institutions with the Aim of Optimize the Routine

Purpose

To evaluate the number of postoperative visits after cataract surgery in two institutions with different routines.

Patients and Methods

A population-based prospective, observational, cohort study was conducted at two institutions in northern Sweden. All cataract surgery cases during a 1-year period were included. The study group was 1249 cases, who followed the standard routine at the Sunderby clinic, ie, no planned postoperative visit for patients without comorbidity who had uncomplicated surgery. All cases (n=1162) having surgery during the same 1-year period at the Umeå clinic were selected as the control group. The routine in Umeå was a planned postoperative visit for all patients after first eye surgery, and on second eye surgery patients with other ocular comorbidity.

Results

A postoperative visit was planned in 44% (555/1249) of the study group and in 83% of all control group cases (966/1162). Significantly less patients in the study group (9% vs 16%; p=0.000036) initiated an unplanned contact. Patients with a distance to the hospital of 70 km or longer were less inclined to seek unplanned care (p=0.016). There was no difference in postoperative outcomes between the patients who initiated contact and those who did not in the study and control hospitals.

Conclusion

Without compromising patient safety, it is possible to reduce the burden of postoperative visits in cases with uncomplicated cataract surgery. A reduction in the number of visits is obtained only if the standard routine is no planned postoperative visits in uncomplicated cases without ocular comorbidity for both first and second eye surgery.

A multilevel analysis of factors influencing the flow efficiency of the cataract surgery process in hospitals

PURPOSE

To detect factors contributing to variation in cataract surgery processes.

METHODS

A multilevel study was conducted to compare the process of cataract surgery between hospitals in Belgium. The main data were collected through non-participative observations and time measurements in four hospitals. Surgeons (n = 16) performing cataract surgery in the selected region and their patients (n = 274) undergoing cataract surgery were observed. Flow efficiency is measured in the operating room (OR) as time for preparation, surgery, exit and turnover.

RESULTS

Flow efficiency in the OR can be negatively influenced by the severity of the cataract [+2.778 (1.139) min in preparation time (p < 0.05); +4.616 (1.786) min in surgery time when severe cataract (p < 0.05)] and the presence of special-cause variation [+2.832 (1.893) min preparation time (p < 0.05); +2.503 (1.277) min surgery time (p < 0.05); +1.181 (0.350) min exit time (p ≤ 0.001)]. Administering topical analgesia instead of peribulbar [+13.548 (4.436) min preparation time (p ≤ 0.001)], retrobulbar [+3.856 (1.548) min surgery time (p ≤ 0.05)] or general analgesia [+5.617 (2.536) min surgery time (p < 0.05); +5.175 (0.817) min exit time (p ≤ 0.001)] enhances flow efficiency. The experience of surgeons (>15 years) impacts flow efficiency [+12.838 (5.922) min surgery time when low experience]. The volume of cataracts performed annually per surgeon did not have a significant impact on flow efficiency. The use of specialized scrub nurses [-7.146 (3.099) min preparation time (p ≤ 0.05); -2.116 (0.586) min turnover time (p ≤ 0.05)] and the eye clinic design [-1.742 (0.686) min exit time (p < 0.05); 2.296 (1.034) min turnover time (p ≤ 0.05)] benefit flow efficiency.

CONCLUSION

Controllable and uncontrollable factors with clinical and organizational causes influencing flow efficiency in the cataract process were found. These factors can be taken into account in the management of the healthcare process.

Benefits and risks of immediately sequential bilateral cataract surgery: a literature review

Immediately sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS) is a highly contended issue in ophthalmology, mainly due to the risk of bilateral endophthalmitis and financial penalties that many ophthalmologists face when performing simultaneous cataract surgeries. The purpose of this review is to understand the current status of the knowledge of ISBCS, mainly its benefits and risks and how they compare with the standard of care, delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery. Evidence, although limited, increasingly supports ISBCS for providing faster rehabilitation, improved visual outcomes, and cost and time savings. Evidence does not support the fear of bilateral endophthalmitis resulting from the simultaneous procedure. However, stronger and greater evidence is needed before ISBCSs can be considered the standard of care. Where ISBCS can potentially create the most beneficial impact is in public eye health programmes in developing countries, but this has not yet been explored.

Immediate versus delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery: an analysis of costs and patient value

PURPOSE

To compare resource utilization of two different strategies for bilateral cataract surgery: immediate sequential cataract surgery (ISCS) versus delayed sequential cataract surgery (DSCS). The purpose was also to analyse the value for the patient of undergoing ISCS versus DSCS.

METHODS

Differences in routines and resource utilization between ISCS (n = 17) and DSCS (n = 80) were studied in a cohort of cataract surgery patients at our clinic in Karlskrona, Sweden. Costs were extracted from an earlier publication by the same clinic. The value for the patient was studied using the capability index, based on published data on the benefit to the patient of ISCS or DSCS using the Catquest questionnaire.

RESULTS

Operating both eyes of a patient was 1.14 times more expensive with DSCS than with ISCS including all surgical costs. The value to the patient of undergoing ISCS depended on the time between first- and second-eye surgery in DSCS and the remaining lifetime after both-eye surgery. A long waiting time for second-eye surgery and a short remaining lifetime decreased the patient value of DSCS compared to ISCS.

CONCLUSION

DSCS is 14% more expensive than ISCS. The value for the patient of ISCS compared to DSCS depends on how long the period will be between first- and second-eye surgery in DSCS and also on the patient's survival time after surgery.

Cost and reimbursement of cataract surgery in Europe: a cross-country comparison

The number of cataract extractions has increased substantially over time. At present, cataract surgery is estimated to be the most common single procedure performed in the developed world. The present study compares the costs of a cataract intervention across nine European countries. To enhance comparability, data were collected using a common template based on a case vignette. Adequate data for analysis were collected from 41 providers and were used to evaluate variation across countries and providers. Ordinary least squares and a multilevel model were used to investigate cost variation. Mean total costs per cataract intervention varied considerably from country to country, ranging from 318 euros in Hungary to 1087 euros in Italy. Variations of a similar magnitude were detected for personnel costs and overheads. However, variations in the cost of the lens were more modest. Overall, our results confirm expectations about the causes of cost variations across EU member states, indicating that these variations may be attributable to the quantity of resources used in performing the operation, the price of resources, and the type of setting in which the operation is performed. The study highlights how accounting practices and available cost data differ across Europe. It also shows the feasibility of collecting data on the basis of vignettes using common cost templates. Studies following this approach will gain importance if cross-country comparisons are to be used to promote European benchmarking exercises.

Global Cost-effectiveness of Cataract Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost-effectiveness of cataract surgery worldwide and to compare it with the cost-effectiveness of comparable medical interventions.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

Approximately 12,000 eyes in the studies selected.

METHODS

Articles were identified by searching the literature using the phrase cataract surgery, in combination with the terms cost, cost-effectiveness, and cost-utility. Terms used for the comparable medical interventions search included epileptic surgery, hip arthroplasty, knee arthroplasty, carpal tunnel surgery, and defibrillator implantation. The search was restricted to the years 1995 through 2006. Cataract surgery costs were converted to 2004 United States dollars (US$). Cost-utility was calculated using: (1) costs discounted at 3% for 12 years with a discounted quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gain of 1.25 years, and (2) costs discounted at 3% for 5 years with a discounted QALY gain of 0.143 years. The Cataract Surgery Affordability Index (CSAI) for each country was calculated by dividing the cost of cataract surgery by the gross national income per capita for the year 2004.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Cost-utility in 2004 US$/QALY and affordability of cataract surgery relative to the United States.

RESULTS

Cost-utility values for cataract surgery (first eye) varied from $245 to $22,000/QALY in Western countries and from $9 to $1600 in developing countries. In developed countries, the cost-effectiveness of cataract surgery estimated by Choosing Interventions That Are Cost Effective ranged from, in international dollars (I$), I$730 to I$2400/disability-adjusted life years (DALY) averted, and I$90 to I$370/DALY averted in developing countries. The CSAI varied from 17% to 189% in developed countries and 29% to 133% in developing countries compared with the United States. The cost-utility of other comparable medical interventions was: epileptic surgery, $4000 to $20,000/QALY; hip arthroplasty, $2300 to $4800/QALY; knee arthroplasty, $6500 to $12,700/QALY; carpal tunnel surgery, $140 to $280/QALY; and defibrillator implantation, $700 to $23,000/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

The cost-utility of cataract surgery varies substantially, depending how the benefit is assessed and on the duration of the assumed benefit. Cataract surgery is comparable in terms of cost-effectiveness to hip arthroplasty, is generally more cost-effective than either knee arthroplasty or defibrillator implantation, and is cost-effective when considered in absolute terms. The operation is considerably cheaper in Europe and Canada compared with the United States and is affordable in many developing countries, particularly India.

Duration of self assessed benefit of cataract extraction: a long term study

AIM

To investigate how long patients' improved visual function lasts after a cataract extraction.

METHODS

Patients' self assessed visual function was evaluated using the Catquest questionnaire both before and 6 months after a cataract extraction. The study population consisted of 615 patients undergoing a cataract extraction during 1995-2002. A final follow up with a new questionnaire was performed in 2003, between 1 year and 8 years after surgery.

RESULTS

445 (72.4%) patients were alive at follow up and agreed to participate in the study. The number of subjects still showing improved visual function after surgery decreased with longer follow up. After 7 years, 80% had improved visual function compared with before surgery. 50% of all originally operated subjects were alive 7 years postoperatively and enjoyed better visual function than they had done before surgery. Ocular co-morbidity in the operated eye or self assessed poor visual function before surgery was significantly related to deteriorated visual function at follow up.

CONCLUSION

The number of subjects who experienced improved visual function after a cataract extraction decreased over the course of time postoperatively. Presence of ocular co-morbidity was significantly related to worsened function.

Change of subjective visual function in first-eye cataract patients when the rate of surgery increases in a population

BACKGROUND

The increasing demand for cataract surgery has stimulated interest in outcome research and the potential public health impact of the intervention.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of an increased rate of first-eye cataract surgery on visual acuity (VA) and subjective visual ability/disability, before and after surgery, in a geographically defined population.

RESEARCH DESIGN

A prospective, observational study.

SUBJECTS

All patients who had first-eye cataract extraction at one clinic during two separate 1-year periods. Five hundred seventy-six patients had surgery in 1997, and 353 had surgery in 1992 (17.2 and 10.6 per 1000 population 65 and older, respectively).

MEASURES

Best-corrected VAs were measured, and the patients answered self-administered questionnaires, before and after surgery. The questionnaires focused on the patients' subjective difficulties performing some common vision-dependent activities, such as reading, television-viewing, orientation, etc.

RESULTS

In 1997 compared with 1992 the VA of the eye to be operated was on average better (chi2 for trend; P<0.0001), and the subjective visual disability was less before surgery (mean disability index 6.9 vs. 7.5; P<0.0001). There was also a smaller percentage of mature cataracts (15% vs. 23%; P<0.0001). After surgery the VA of the operated eye was better in 1997 (chi2 for trend; P<0.001), but there was no difference in improvement of subjective visual ability, nor change in subjective visual disability, compared with 1992. The patients' expectations and actual postoperative improvement of their ability to cope with daily life were higher in 1997 (chi2 for trend; P<0.0001 and P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A higher frequency of first-eye cataract surgery in a population was before surgery associated with an on average better VA of the eye to be operated, a less perceived visual disability regarding some common vision-dependent activities, a lower percentage of mature cataracts and thus earlier surgery. Consequently, a higher rate of surgery would likely be associated with a lesser amount of visual impairment because of cataract in the population.

The Swedish National Cataract Register: A 9-year review

The Swedish National Cataract Register (NCR) has been collecting data on cataract extractions in Sweden since 1992. This unique national database now contains data pertaining to more than 400 000 operations, representing 93.4% of all operations performed nationwide during 1992-2000. Clinic participation in the NCR is voluntary. Tests have shown NCR data to be extremely reliable, while the participation of nearly all providers of cataract surgery in Sweden makes the data highly representative of cataract surgery throughout the country. The NCR collects pre- and per-operative data for every cataract extraction performed at participating clinics. Surgical outcome data and data about patients' self-assessed visual function is collected in approximately 10% of cases. Since 1998, all cases of suspected postoperative endophthalmitis have also been reported to the NCR. The rate of surgery has increased from 4.47 to 7.26 per 1000 inhabitants during the period. Female subjects have constituted about 66% of all operated subjects each year and the mean age of patients has slowly increased from 75.2 to 76.1 years. Average pre-operative visual acuity has improved each year. Second eye surgery has increased from 28.5% to 36.8% of all surgeries. Phacoemulsification has reached 98% as type of surgery (in 2000) and 92.7% of all intraocular lenses are foldable. Surgical outcome has improved by achieving a final refraction closer to the target refraction and less surgically induced astigmatism. The positive impact of cataract surgery in very elderly people has been demonstrated, as has the positive effect of second eye surgery, especially in young subjects. The NCR has served to enhance knowledge about trends and results of cataract surgery in Sweden. This review article describes some of the activities carried out and their results.

Cataract surgery and effectiveness. 2. An index approach for the measurement of output and efficiency of cataract surgery at different surgery departments

PURPOSE

To describe a model for comparing the performance of cataract surgery among ophthalmology departments in terms of economic efficiency.

METHODS

An index approach for the measurement of outcome of cataract surgery is modeled. The index approach uses information about activities and difficulties in daily life as well as visual acuity and age. The change in activities and difficulties after surgery is expressed by changes in distances, and an overall index score is calculated as ratios of values to distances. Values to distances are estimated as solutions to linear programming problems. Index scores are calculated for two groups of patients, those with an ocular co-morbidity and those without. Economic efficiency is also estimated by use of an index approach. In the estimation of efficiency we use the calculated index scores of outcome of surgery as a measure of output of the ophthalmology department. Four different departments providing cataract surgery are compared.

RESULTS

The studied departments showed differences to a great extent when traditional measures of cataract surgery outcomes were used. These differences changed when the outcomes were compared by use of index scores. When economic efficiency was calculated the difference between the departments was further reduced and only one department was considered inefficient according to the model.

CONCLUSION

An index approach was used to study outcomes of cataract surgery and economic efficiency in four departments. This approach takes into account the complexity of cost in relation to feasible outcome. The ranking between the departments described by traditional methods turned out differently using the model.