Abstract
Introduction:
The use of telehealth screening (TS) for diabetic retinopathy (DR) consists of fundus photography in a primary care setting with remote interpretation of images. TS for DR is known to increase screening utilization and reduce vision loss compared with standard in-person conventional diabetic retinal exam (CDRE). Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor intravitreal injections have become standard of care for the treatment of DR, but they are expensive. We investigated whether TS for DR is cost-effective when DR management includes intravitreal injections using national data.
Materials and Methods:
We compared cost and effectiveness of TS and CDRE using decision-tree analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis with Monte Carlo simulation. We considered the disability weight (DW) of vision impairment and 1-year direct medical costs of managing patients based on Medicare allowable rates and clinical trial data. Primary outcomes include incremental costs and incremental effectiveness.
Results:
The average annual direct cost of eye care was $196 per person for TS and $275 for CDRE. On average, TS saves $78 (28%) compared with CDRE and was cost saving in 88.9% of simulations. The average DW outcome was equivalent in both groups.
Discussion:
Although this study was limited by a 1-year time horizon, it provides support that TS for DR can reduce costs of DR management despite expensive treatment with anti-VEGF agents. TS for DR is equally effective as CDRE at preserving vision.
Conclusions:
Annual TS for DR is cost saving and equally effective compared with CDRE given a 1-year time horizon.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
