Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Marilyn James a Centre for Health Planning and
Management, University of Keele, Keele, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, b St Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospitals,
Liverpool L7 8XP, c Department of Diabetes and Endocrinology, Royal Liverpool
University Hospitals
Correspondence to: M James m.james{at}keele.ac.uk
Objective:
To measure the cost effectiveness of
systematic photographic screening for sight threatening diabetic eye
disease compared with existing practice.
Design:
Cost effectiveness analysis
Setting:
Liverpool.
Subjects:
A target population of 5000 diabetic
patients invited for screening.
Main outcome measures:
Cost effectiveness (cost per
true positive) of systematic and opportunistic programmes;
incremental cost effectiveness of replacing opportunistic with
systematic screening.
Results:
Baseline prevalence of sight threatening eye disease was 14.1%. The cost effectiveness of the systematic programme was £209 (sensitivity 89%, specificity 86%, compliance 80%, annual cost £104 996) and of the opportunistic programme was £289 (combined sensitivity 63%, specificity 92%, compliance 78%, annual cost £99 981). The incremental cost effectiveness of completely replacing the opportunistic programme was £32. Absolute values of cost
effectiveness were highly sensitive to varying prevalence, sensitivity
and specificity, compliance, and programme size.
Conclusion:
Replacing existing programmes with
systematic screening for diabetic eye disease is justified.
Read all Rapid Responses