Cost-Utility Analysis of a Medication Adherence-Enhancing Educational Intervention for Glaucoma

被引:1
|
作者
Hung, Anna [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Williams, Andrew M. [4 ,5 ]
Newman-Casey, Paula Anne [6 ]
Muir, Kelly W. [1 ,4 ]
Gatwood, Justin [7 ]
机构
[1] Durham Vet Affairs Hlth Care Syst, Durham Ctr Innovat Accelerate Discovery & Practic, Durham, NC USA
[2] Duke Univ, Sch Med, Dept Populat Hlth Sci, Durham, NC 27701 USA
[3] Duke Margolis Ctr Hlth Policy, Durham, NC USA
[4] Duke Univ, Sch Med, Dept Ophthalmol, Durham, NC USA
[5] Univ Pittsburgh, Sch Med, Dept Ophthalmol, Pittsburgh, PA USA
[6] Univ Michigan, Kellogg Eye Ctr, Ann Arbor, MI USA
[7] Univ Tennessee, Hlth Sci Ctr, Coll Pharm, Memphis, TN USA
来源
OPHTHALMOLOGY GLAUCOMA | 2023年 / 6卷 / 04期
关键词
Cost-effectiveness; Glaucoma; Medication adherence; VISUAL-FIELD PROGRESSION; INTRAOCULAR-PRESSURE FLUCTUATION; OPEN-ANGLE GLAUCOMA; OCULAR HYPERTENSION; HEALTH; COMMUNICATION; LATANOPROST; BLINDNESS; BARRIERS; PEOPLE;
D O I
10.1016/j.ogla.2023.01.006
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Objective: To evaluate the cost utility of a glaucoma medication-enhancing intervention compared to standard of care over a lifetime from the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) payer perspective. Design: Model-based cost-utility analysis of a glaucoma medication-enhancing intervention from a ran-domized clinical trial. Subjects: Veterans with glaucoma, or suspected glaucoma who were prescribed topical glaucoma medi-cations, had their visual field assessed within the last 9 months, and endorsed poor glaucoma medication adherence. Methods: Veterans were randomized either to a behavioral intervention to promote adherence or to a standard of care (control) session about general eye health. A decision analytic model was developed to simulate lifelong costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for an intervention tested in a randomized clinical trial at a single VA eye clinic. Costs included direct medical costs that the VA payer would incur, as informed initially by the clinical trial and then by published estimates. Health-state quality of life was based on published utility values. Scenario analyses included addition of booster interventions, a 3% decline in chance of staying medication adherent annually, and the combination of the two. Analyses were also conducted in the following subgroups: those with companion versus not, and those with once-daily versus more than once-daily dosing frequency. Main Outcome Measures: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results: Compared to standard of care, the intervention dominated resulting in lower costs ($23 339.28 versus $23 504.02) and higher QALYs (11.62 versus 11.58). Among the 4 subgroups, the intervention dominated for 3 of them. In the fourth subgroup, those with more than once-daily dosing, the ICER was $2625/QALY. Compared to standard of care, an intervention with booster interventions led to an ICER of $3278/QALY. Assuming both a 3% annual loss in chance of continuing to be adherent and addition of booster interventions, the ICER increased to $71 371/QALY. Conclusions: From a VA payer perspective over a lifetime, the glaucoma medication-enhancing behavioral intervention dominated standard of care in terms of generating cost savings and greater QALYs. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references. Ophthalmology Glaucoma 2023;6:395-404 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Ophthalmology
引用
收藏
页码:395 / 404
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Cost-utility analysis - Response
    Neumann, PJ
    Chapman, RH
    Stone, PW
    ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2001, 134 (07) : 626 - 626
  • [32] Cost-utility analysis and otolaryngology
    Hamilton, D.
    Hulme, C.
    Flood, L.
    Powell, S.
    JOURNAL OF LARYNGOLOGY AND OTOLOGY, 2014, 128 (02): : 112 - 118
  • [33] COST-UTILITY ANALYSIS OF THERAPY FOR GLAUCOMA: A PILOT STUDY FOR REPUBLIC OF NORTH MACEDONIA
    Velkovski, Z.
    Kamusheva, M.
    Dimitrova, M.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2022, 25 (01) : S109 - S109
  • [34] Patient adherence: A blind spot in cost-utility analyses?
    Rosen, AB
    Stone, PW
    Greenberg, D
    Chapman, RH
    Olchanski, NV
    Nadai, J
    Neumann, PJ
    JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2003, 18 : 165 - 165
  • [35] An economic and cost-utility analysis of occupational therapy intervention after stroke
    Logan, P. A.
    Quinn, C.
    Walker, M.
    Elliott, R. A.
    Gladman, J. R. F.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY, 2012, 75 : 167 - 167
  • [36] Cost-utility analysis of a dance intervention for adolescent girls with internalizing problems
    Philipsson A.
    Duberg A.
    Möller M.
    Hagberg L.
    Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 11 (1)
  • [37] An intervention to increase physicians' use of adherence-enhancing strategies in managing hypercholesterolemic patients
    Casebeer, LL
    Klapow, JC
    Centor, RM
    Stafford, MA
    Renkl, LA
    Mallinger, AP
    Kristofco, RE
    ACADEMIC MEDICINE, 1999, 74 (12) : 1334 - 1339
  • [38] THE BURDEN OF NON-ADHERENCE WITH ORAL BISPHOSPHONATES AND THE POTENTIAL COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF ADHERENCE-ENHANCING INTERVENTIONS
    Hiligsmann, M.
    Rabenda, V.
    Bruyere, O.
    Reginster, J. Y.
    OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL, 2010, 21 : 381 - 382
  • [39] Personalising adherence-enhancing interventions using a smart inhaler in patients with COPD: an exploratory cost-effectiveness analysis
    Job F. M. van Boven
    Breda Cushen
    Imran Sulaiman
    Garrett Greene
    Elaine MacHale
    Matshediso C. Mokoka
    Frank Doyle
    Richard B. Reilly
    Kathleen Bennett
    Richard W. Costello
    npj Primary Care Respiratory Medicine, 28
  • [40] Cost-utility analysis for statins in Mexico
    Quevedo, MJF
    Contreras, I
    Nevarez, A
    García-Contreras, F
    Constantino-Casas, P
    Garduño, J
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2005, 8 (03) : 269 - 269