Advertisement

Economic Considerations of Glaucoma Drainage Devices

  • Maneesh Singh
  • Arijit Mitra
Chapter

Abstract

Cost considerations are a major concern when it comes to medical management of glaucoma in the developing world.The poor availability of anti-glaucoma medications , lack of health insurance and extremely poor adherence to therapy complicate things further.It is due to these reasons that surgical management is considered as an extremely important and effective treatment modality.However there is lack of published data comparing the cost effectiveness or cost utility of medical , laser and surgical management of glaucoma.Furthermore there are very few articles discussing the economic considerations of trabeculectomy or glaucoma drainage devices.This section tries to look into the economic considerations of glaucoma drainage devices and highlights certain important issues related to it.

References

  1. 1.
    Quigley H, Broman AT. The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90:262–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, et al. Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: results from Early Manifests Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(10):1268–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD, et al. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;2120(6):714–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gedde SJ, Schiffman JC, Feuer WJ, et al. Treatment outcomes in the Tube Versus Trabeculectomy (TVT) study after five years of follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012;153(5):789–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gedde SJ, the Tube Versus Trabeculectomy Study Group. Results from the Tube Versus Trabeculectomy Study. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2009;16(3):107–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tuulonen A. Economic considerations of the diagnosis and management for glaucoma in developed world. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2011;22:102–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boeteng W. Economics of surgery worldwide. In: Shaarawy TM, Sherwood MB, editors. Glaucoma, vol. 2. Edinburgh: Saunders Elsevier; 2009. p. 13–6.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lam BL, Zheng D, Davila EP, et al. Trends in glaucoma medication expenditure. Medical expenditure panel survey 2001–2006. Arch Ophthalmol. 2011;129:1345–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Anand A, Negi S, Khokhar S, et al. Role of early trabeculectomy in primary open angle glaucoma in developing world. Eye. 2007;21:40–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tseng VL, Coleman AL, Chang MY, Caprioli J. Aqueous shunts for glaucoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;7:CD004918.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    American Academy of Ophthalmology Glaucoma Panel. Preferred Practice Pattern Guidelines. Primary open angle glaucoma. San Francisco, CA: American Academy of Ophthalmology; 2010. www.aao.org/ppp.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ramulu PY, Corcoran KJ, Corcoran SL, Robin AL. Utilization of various glaucoma surgeries and procedures in medicare beneficiaries from 1995 to 2004. Ophthalmology. 2007;114(12):2265–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Desai MA, Gedde SJ, Feuer WJ. Practice preferences for glaucoma surgery: a survey of American Glaucoma Society in 2008. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2011;42(3):202–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Minckler DS, Francis BA, Hodapp EA, et al. Aqueous shunts in glaucoma. A report by American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology. 2008;115(6):1089–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tuulonen A. Economics of surgery worldwide. In: Shaarawy TM, Sherwood MB, editors. Glaucoma, vol. 2. Edinburgh: Saunders Elsevier; 2009. p. 3–11.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee P, Matchar DB. Economics of glaucoma care. In: Shaarawy TM, Sherwood MB, editors. Glaucoma, vol. 1. Edinburgh: Saunders Elsevier; 2009. p. 25–32.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tuulonen A, Airaksinen PJ, Erola E, et al. The Finnish Evidence Based Guideline for glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2003;81:3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Burr J, Azuara-Blanco A, Avenell A. Medical versus surgical intervention for open angle glaucoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;(2):CD004399.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Whittaker KW, Gillow JT, Cunliffe IA. Is the role of trabeculectomy in glaucoma management changing? Eye. 2001;15:449–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rachmiel R, Trope GE, Chipman ML, et al. Laser trabeculoplasty trends with introduction of new medical treatments and selective laser trabeculoplasty. J Glaucoma. 2006;15:306–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ainsworth JR, Jay JL. Cost analysis of early trabeculectomy versus conventional management in primary open angle glaucoma. Eye. 1991;5:322–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kaplan R, Moraes CGD, Cioffi GA, et al. Comparative cost effectiveness of the Baerveldt implant, Trabeculectomy with mitomycin and medical treatment. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015;133(5):560–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kaushik S, Kataria P, Raj S, et al. Safety and efficacy of a low cost glaucoma drainage device for refractory childhood glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2017;101(12):1623–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maneesh Singh
    • 1
  • Arijit Mitra
    • 2
  1. 1.Glaucoma and Cataract ServicesB.B. Eye FoundationKolkataIndia
  2. 2.Glaucoma and Cataract ServicesDisha Eye Hospitals Pvt. Ltd.KolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations