Cost-utility analysis of telemedicine and ophthalmoscopy for retinopathy of prematurity management

Kevin M. Jackson, Karen E. Scott, Joshua Graff Zivin, David A. Bateman, John T. Flynn, Jeremy D. Keenan, Michael Chiang

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

67 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine and standard ophthalmoscopy for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) management. Methods: Models were developed to represent ROP examination and treatment using telemedicine and standard ophthalmoscopy. Cost-utility analysis was performed using decision analysis, evidence-based outcome data from published literature, and present value modeling. Visual outcome data were converted to patient preference-based time trade-off utility values based on published literature. Costs of disease management were determined based on 2006 Medicare reimbursements. Costs per quality-adjusted life year gained by telemedicine and ophthalmoscopy for ROP management were compared. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed on the following variables: discount rate (0%-7%), incidence of treatment-requiring ROP (1%-20%), sensitivity and specificity of ophthalmoscopic diagnosis (75%-100%), percentage of readable telemedicine images (75%-100%), and sensitivity and specificity of telemedicine diagnosis (75%-100%). Results: For infants with birth weight less than 1500 g using a 3% discount rate for costs and outcomes, the costs per quality-adjusted life year gained were $3193 with telemedicine and $5617 with standard ophthalmoscopy. Sensitivity analysis resulted in ranges of costs per quality-adjusted life year from $1235 to $18 898 for telemedicine and from $2171 to $27 215 for ophthalmoscopy. Conclusions: Telemedicine is more cost-effective than standard ophthalmoscopy for ROP management. Both strategies are highly cost-effective compared with other health care interventions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)493-499
Number of pages7
JournalArchives of Ophthalmology
Volume126
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2008
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Ophthalmoscopy
Retinopathy of Prematurity
Telemedicine
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Costs and Cost Analysis
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Sensitivity and Specificity
Cost of Illness
Decision Support Techniques
Patient Preference
Disease Management
Medicare
Birth Weight
Delivery of Health Care
Incidence
Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

Jackson, K. M., Scott, K. E., Graff Zivin, J., Bateman, D. A., Flynn, J. T., Keenan, J. D., & Chiang, M. (2008). Cost-utility analysis of telemedicine and ophthalmoscopy for retinopathy of prematurity management. Archives of Ophthalmology, 126(4), 493-499. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.126.4.493

Cost-utility analysis of telemedicine and ophthalmoscopy for retinopathy of prematurity management. / Jackson, Kevin M.; Scott, Karen E.; Graff Zivin, Joshua; Bateman, David A.; Flynn, John T.; Keenan, Jeremy D.; Chiang, Michael.

In: Archives of Ophthalmology, Vol. 126, No. 4, 04.2008, p. 493-499.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Jackson, Kevin M. ; Scott, Karen E. ; Graff Zivin, Joshua ; Bateman, David A. ; Flynn, John T. ; Keenan, Jeremy D. ; Chiang, Michael. / Cost-utility analysis of telemedicine and ophthalmoscopy for retinopathy of prematurity management. In: Archives of Ophthalmology. 2008 ; Vol. 126, No. 4. pp. 493-499.
@article{6ca0532aea02478da3917778a09dadc6,
title = "Cost-utility analysis of telemedicine and ophthalmoscopy for retinopathy of prematurity management",
abstract = "Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine and standard ophthalmoscopy for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) management. Methods: Models were developed to represent ROP examination and treatment using telemedicine and standard ophthalmoscopy. Cost-utility analysis was performed using decision analysis, evidence-based outcome data from published literature, and present value modeling. Visual outcome data were converted to patient preference-based time trade-off utility values based on published literature. Costs of disease management were determined based on 2006 Medicare reimbursements. Costs per quality-adjusted life year gained by telemedicine and ophthalmoscopy for ROP management were compared. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed on the following variables: discount rate (0{\%}-7{\%}), incidence of treatment-requiring ROP (1{\%}-20{\%}), sensitivity and specificity of ophthalmoscopic diagnosis (75{\%}-100{\%}), percentage of readable telemedicine images (75{\%}-100{\%}), and sensitivity and specificity of telemedicine diagnosis (75{\%}-100{\%}). Results: For infants with birth weight less than 1500 g using a 3{\%} discount rate for costs and outcomes, the costs per quality-adjusted life year gained were $3193 with telemedicine and $5617 with standard ophthalmoscopy. Sensitivity analysis resulted in ranges of costs per quality-adjusted life year from $1235 to $18 898 for telemedicine and from $2171 to $27 215 for ophthalmoscopy. Conclusions: Telemedicine is more cost-effective than standard ophthalmoscopy for ROP management. Both strategies are highly cost-effective compared with other health care interventions.",
author = "Jackson, {Kevin M.} and Scott, {Karen E.} and {Graff Zivin}, Joshua and Bateman, {David A.} and Flynn, {John T.} and Keenan, {Jeremy D.} and Michael Chiang",
year = "2008",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1001/archopht.126.4.493",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "126",
pages = "493--499",
journal = "JAMA Ophthalmology",
issn = "2168-6165",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-utility analysis of telemedicine and ophthalmoscopy for retinopathy of prematurity management

AU - Jackson, Kevin M.

AU - Scott, Karen E.

AU - Graff Zivin, Joshua

AU - Bateman, David A.

AU - Flynn, John T.

AU - Keenan, Jeremy D.

AU - Chiang, Michael

PY - 2008/4

Y1 - 2008/4

N2 - Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine and standard ophthalmoscopy for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) management. Methods: Models were developed to represent ROP examination and treatment using telemedicine and standard ophthalmoscopy. Cost-utility analysis was performed using decision analysis, evidence-based outcome data from published literature, and present value modeling. Visual outcome data were converted to patient preference-based time trade-off utility values based on published literature. Costs of disease management were determined based on 2006 Medicare reimbursements. Costs per quality-adjusted life year gained by telemedicine and ophthalmoscopy for ROP management were compared. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed on the following variables: discount rate (0%-7%), incidence of treatment-requiring ROP (1%-20%), sensitivity and specificity of ophthalmoscopic diagnosis (75%-100%), percentage of readable telemedicine images (75%-100%), and sensitivity and specificity of telemedicine diagnosis (75%-100%). Results: For infants with birth weight less than 1500 g using a 3% discount rate for costs and outcomes, the costs per quality-adjusted life year gained were $3193 with telemedicine and $5617 with standard ophthalmoscopy. Sensitivity analysis resulted in ranges of costs per quality-adjusted life year from $1235 to $18 898 for telemedicine and from $2171 to $27 215 for ophthalmoscopy. Conclusions: Telemedicine is more cost-effective than standard ophthalmoscopy for ROP management. Both strategies are highly cost-effective compared with other health care interventions.

AB - Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine and standard ophthalmoscopy for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) management. Methods: Models were developed to represent ROP examination and treatment using telemedicine and standard ophthalmoscopy. Cost-utility analysis was performed using decision analysis, evidence-based outcome data from published literature, and present value modeling. Visual outcome data were converted to patient preference-based time trade-off utility values based on published literature. Costs of disease management were determined based on 2006 Medicare reimbursements. Costs per quality-adjusted life year gained by telemedicine and ophthalmoscopy for ROP management were compared. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed on the following variables: discount rate (0%-7%), incidence of treatment-requiring ROP (1%-20%), sensitivity and specificity of ophthalmoscopic diagnosis (75%-100%), percentage of readable telemedicine images (75%-100%), and sensitivity and specificity of telemedicine diagnosis (75%-100%). Results: For infants with birth weight less than 1500 g using a 3% discount rate for costs and outcomes, the costs per quality-adjusted life year gained were $3193 with telemedicine and $5617 with standard ophthalmoscopy. Sensitivity analysis resulted in ranges of costs per quality-adjusted life year from $1235 to $18 898 for telemedicine and from $2171 to $27 215 for ophthalmoscopy. Conclusions: Telemedicine is more cost-effective than standard ophthalmoscopy for ROP management. Both strategies are highly cost-effective compared with other health care interventions.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=42249105678&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=42249105678&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/archopht.126.4.493

DO - 10.1001/archopht.126.4.493

M3 - Article

C2 - 18413518

AN - SCOPUS:42249105678

VL - 126

SP - 493

EP - 499

JO - JAMA Ophthalmology

JF - JAMA Ophthalmology

SN - 2168-6165

IS - 4

ER -