作者: Juha Hagman
DOI:
关键词: Optometry 、 Visual field test 、 Open angle glaucoma 、 Glaucoma 、 Glaucoma medication 、 Emergency medicine 、 Randomized controlled trial 、 Retrospective cohort study 、 Quality of life 、 Intraocular pressure 、 Medicine
摘要: The aim of this 11-year retrospective study was to evaluate the impact two spending patterns in glaucoma care on patient outcomes. Two cities were selected because statistics Finnish Social Insurance Institution have repeatedly shown a difference their mean costs medications per patient, i.e. Oulu more and Turku less than national average. Patients with newly diagnosed open angle 1994–96 identified from register for reimbursement medication costs. 45–74 years old when treatment initiated after which they had consistently used ≥ 10 years. For availability cost data, place residence required remain unchanged during 1994–2006. In 2006 sent invitations 360 patients whom 168 (47%) participated completed protocol (85 83 Turku). All underwent an ophthalmic examination (visual acuity, intraocular pressure, visual field test, retinal nerve fiber layer optic disc photography). addition, filled out 15D health related quality life questionnaire. 11 collected each individually. follow up year, total added including medications, physician visits, diagnostic follow-up tests as well laser or surgical procedures. 35% higher (6010 €) compared (4452 €). Total increased worsening disease. After treatment, 40% did not show any structural functional damage. Medication accounted 73% addition 29% Oulu, other also 46% Oulu. different stages glaucoma, treatments (medication, surgery) (photographs fields) taken spite resource consumption, instrument indicate better living There actually statistically significant counterintuitive early group, using resources reported worse life. This is first evaluating high utilization reporting utility values glaucoma. Results that allocation may always lead measurable benefits society terms glaucoma-induced disability and/or Further data randomized trials both unselected populations pragmatic ‘usual patients’ large sample sizes are required.