...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of cataract and refractive surgery >Socioeconomic aspects of laser in situ keratomileusis, eyeglasses, and contact lenses in mild to moderate myopia.
【24h】

Socioeconomic aspects of laser in situ keratomileusis, eyeglasses, and contact lenses in mild to moderate myopia.

机译:轻度至中度近视眼中激光原位角膜磨镶术,眼镜和隐形眼镜的社会经济因素。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

To compare the societal costs and consequences of 3 strategies to correct mild to moderate myopia: laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), eyeglasses, and contact lenses (CLs).Instituto Oftalmologico de Alicante, Alicante, Spain.A Markov model was set up to compare the present value of LASIK, eyeglasses, and CLs. A structured questionnaire was administered to 40 consecutive patients with mild to moderate myopia to collect resource information including direct medical and nonmedical costs as well as indirect costs (transportation, time spent, hotel, eyeglasses, CLs, LASIK, cleaning products, visits to ophthalmologist/optometrist/optical center, and adverse events linked to LASIK and CLs). The time period ranged from 10 to 30 years with a 5% discount rate. The Spanish population was used as the basis for the economic data. Full sensitivity analyses were conducted.Based on the time period, LASIK saved from 18 to 278 km in distance to care centers compared with eyeglasses and from 405 to 1436 km compared with CLs. The time to care for visual acuity was similar between LASIK and CLs, but up to 1180 additional hours were spent by CL users. Laser in situ keratomileusis saved from 4.69 to 12.07 eyeglasses and from 28 to 84 eyeglass cleaning packs. With LASIK, there were 18 to 50 visits to the optical center compared with 41 to 117 visits with CLs. Laser in situ keratomileusis saved 4.7 to 12.2 visits to correct visual acuity compared with eyeglasses and CLs. It prevented 95 to 295 per 10 000 cases of CL-related keratitis. Contact lenses were always more costly than LASIK, which was always more costly than eyeglasses. The 2 sensitivity parameters were time period and discount rate.Laser in situ keratomileusis was less costly than CLs and more expensive than eyeglasses, although the potential nonmonetary benefit of LASIK over eyeglasses was not taken into account.
机译:为了比较矫正轻度至中度近视的3种策略的社会成本和后果:西班牙阿利坎特阿塔坎特省Oftalmologico de Alicante研究所采用了激光原位角膜磨镶术(LASIK),眼镜和隐形眼镜(CLs)。比较LASIK,眼镜和CL的现值。对40位连续的轻度至中度近视患者进行了结构化问卷调查,以收集资源信息,包括直接医疗和非医疗费用以及间接费用(运输,花费的时间,酒店,眼镜,CL,LASIK,清洁产品,拜访眼科医生/验光师/光学中心,以及与LASIK和CL相关的不良事件)。时间范围为10到30年,折扣率为5%。西班牙人口被用作经济数据的基础。进行了全面的敏感性分析,根据该时间段,与眼镜相比,LASIK到护理中心的距离节省了18至278 km,而CL则节省了405至1436 km。 LASIK和CL之间的视敏度护理时间相似,但CL用户最多花费了1180个小时。激光原位角膜磨镶术可节省4.69至12.07眼镜,并节省28至84个眼镜清洁包。使用LASIK,对光学中心的拜访次数为18至50,而使用CL的拜访者为41至117。与眼镜和CL相比,激光原位角膜磨镶术可节省4.7至12.2次就诊,以矫正视力。每万例CL相关性角膜炎可预防95至295例。隐形眼镜总是比LASIK贵,而LASIK总是比眼镜贵。这两个敏感度参数是时间段和折现率。尽管未考虑LASIK相对于眼镜的潜在非货币利益,但激光原位角膜磨镶术比CL便宜,但比眼镜贵。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号