首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand =: Chotmaihet thangphaet >Cost-effectiveness analysis of manual small incision cataract surgery (MSICS) and phacoemulsification (PE)
【24h】

Cost-effectiveness analysis of manual small incision cataract surgery (MSICS) and phacoemulsification (PE)

机译:人工小切口白内障手术(MSICS)和超声乳化(PE)的成本效益分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Background: Cataract is the most common cause of blindness, responsible for 50 to 80% of all blindness in South-East Asia. Method of cataract surgery that has cost-effective, low technology procedure and a low complication rate in the shortest amount of time is needed. This study provides the useful resources comparing clinical outcomes and cost of phacoemulsification (PE) and manual small incision cataract surgery (MSICS) based on hospital perspective. Objective: To compare the costs and effectiveness of two-cataract-surgery methods, MSICS and PE, using the hospital's perspective. Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, Phrapoklao hospital, Thailand. Material and Method: This study was prospective and comparative. Data was collected from medical charts and through patient interviews using data collection forms. Labor, material and capital cost were recorded for both surgical methods. The effectiveness was measured in visual acuity (VA), astigmatism and complications occurring at 90 days after surgery. Results: The average total cost was 10,043.81bath/case for MSICS and 11,590.72bath/case for PE. After 90 days after surgery, the average VA of MSICS and PE groups were 0.83 ± 0.225 (0.10-1.00) and 0.76 ± 0.268 (0.06-1.00). There was no statistically significant difference in both groups. The average astigmatism at 90 days after surgery was 1.01 ± 0.733 (0.00-3.50) D and 0.99 ± 0.713 (0.00-4.25) D for MSICS and PE method. The average change in astigmatism was 0.15 and 0.20 D for the MSICS and PE groups. The intraoperative complication was vitreous loss (1.40%) in the PE group. The postoperative complication was corneal edema (5.60%) in the MSICS group. There was no statistically significant difference in the number of postoperative complications in both groups (p = 0.16). Conclusion: The effectiveness of MSICS and PE methods was not significantly different, but PE method had higher costs. Therefore, MSICS has better cost-effectiveness than PE thus, MSICS should be a preferred cataract surgery method to PE method, based on the hospital's perspective.
机译:背景:白内障是导致失明的最常见原因,占东南亚所有失明的50%至80%。需要一种白内障手术的方法,该方法具有成本效益,技术流程低,并发症发生率低,且在最短的时间内。这项研究提供了有用的资源,可根据医院的观点比较超声乳化(PE)和人工小切口白内障手术(MSICS)的临床结果和费用。目的:从医院的角度比较两种白内障手术方法(MSICS和PE)的成本和有效性。地点:泰国Phrapoklao医院眼科。材料和方法:这项研究是前瞻性和比较性的。数据是从医学图表中收集的,并通过使用数据收集表的患者访谈来收集。两种手术方法均记录了人工,材料和资本成本。评估术后90天出现的视敏度(VA),散光和并发症的有效性。结果:MSICS的平均总成本为10,043.81浴/箱,PE的平均总成本为11,590.72浴/箱。术后90天,MSICS和PE组的平均VA为0.83±0.225(0.10-1.00)和0.76±0.268(0.06-1.00)。两组均无统计学差异。对于MSICS和PE方法,术后90天的平均散光为1.01±0.733(0.00-3.50)D和0.99±0.713(0.00-4.25)D。 MSICS和PE组的平均散光变化为0.15和0.20D。 PE组术中并发症为玻璃体丢失(1.40%)。 MSICS组术后并发症为角膜水肿(5.60%)。两组术后并发症的数量均无统计学差异(p = 0.16)。结论:MSICS和PE方法的有效性没有显着差异,但PE方法具有较高的成本。因此,MSICS具有比PE更好的成本效益,因此,根据医院的观点,MSICS应该是PE方法的首选白内障手术方法。

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