Immediate versus delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery in children: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Issue 2 (20th November 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Cernat, Alexandra; Jamieson, Margaret; Kavelaars, RuthAnne; Khalili, Sina; Bhambhwani, Vishaal; Mireskandari, Kamiar; Moretti, Myla E
• Is Part Of: British journal of ophthalmology. Volume 106:Issue 2(2022)
• Page Start: 211
• Page End: 217
• Publication Date: 2020-11-20
• Subjects: child health (paediatrics) -- treatment surgery; Ophthalmology -- Periodicals; 617.7
• DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-316507
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0007-1161

Abstract

Abstract : Background/aims: Children with bilateral cataracts may undergo immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS), which involves surgery on both eyes during the same general anaesthesia, or delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery (DSBCS), which involves operating on each eye on separate days and requires a second anaesthesia. ISBCS is viewed with caution because of the risk of bilateral endophthalmitis. Proponents of ISBCS emphasise that the incidence of serious complications is low and is outweighed by benefits such as avoidance of multiple anaesthesia, faster visual rehabilitation and potential for decreased costs. However, there is a paucity of literature regarding the cost-effectiveness of ISBCS in children. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine whether ISBCS is more cost-effective than DSBCS from the societal and health system perspectives in Ontario, Canada, which has a universal, single-payer system. Methods: A retrospective analysis of children who underwent ISBCS or DSBCS at a tertiary referral paediatric hospital was conducted. A decision tree was constructed using TreeAge Pro 2018 software. Clear visual axis was the measure of effectiveness. A time horizon of 8 weeks postoperatively was adopted. Both direct and indirect costs were included. Results: Fifty-three children were included, 37 in the ISBCS group and 16 in the DSBCS group. ISBCS and DSBCS were equally effective. ISBCS resulted in cost-savings of $3, 776 (95% CI:−$4, 641 to $12, 578) CAD, per patient, from the societal perspective and $2, 200 (95% CI:−$5, 615 to $10, 373) CAD per patient from the health system perspective. Conclusion: ISBCS was less costly than DSBCS from both societal and health system perspectives while being equally effective.