Cargando…

Cost Burden of Endothelial Keratoplasty in Fuchs Endothelial Dystrophy: Real-World Analysis of a Commercially Insured US Population (2014–2019)

PURPOSE: To assess the incremental burden of corneal transplant surgery for US commercially insured patients with Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD) treated with endothelial keratoplasty (EK) compared to controls. METHODS: The study design was retrospective cohort using IBM(®) MarketScan(®)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dhaliwal, Deepinder K, Chirikov, Viktor, Schmier, Jordana, Rege, Sanika, Newton, Schalon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8995174/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35418743
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S358847
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: To assess the incremental burden of corneal transplant surgery for US commercially insured patients with Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD) treated with endothelial keratoplasty (EK) compared to controls. METHODS: The study design was retrospective cohort using IBM(®) MarketScan(®) claims (January 2014–September 2019) and included EK-treated (N=1562) and control patients (N=23,485) having ≥12 months’ enrollment before and after diagnosis, who were subsequently matched on select characteristics. The index date was the beginning of the pre-operative period (3 months before EK); synthetic EK index was assigned for controls. All-cause, eye-disease, and complication-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs were compared up to 36 months post index. For a small subset of patients, patient data were linked to the Health and Productivity Management supplemental database, which integrates data on productivity loss and disability payments. RESULTS: Matched cohorts included 804 EK-treated and 1453 controls with average age 65.7 years, 1383 (61%) female. Over 12 months of follow-up, all-cause ($41,199 vs $20,222, p<0.001) and eye-disease related costs ($22,951 vs $1389, p<0.001) were higher among EK-treated patients than controls. The cost differential increased additionally by $1000–$2000 per annum by 36 months of follow-up. While balanced at baseline, over follow-up EK-treated patients had higher prevalence of glaucoma, elevated intraocular pressure, cataract, cataract surgery, diagnosis of cornea transplant rejection, retinal edema. By 36 month of follow-up, EK-treated patients had 9 more short-term disability days, resulting in $2992 additional burden of disability payments. CONCLUSION: This study found a higher cost burden among FECD patients receiving EK treatment versus those who did not. With a shift in management of FECD, cost burden estimates generated in this study could serve as an important benchmark for future studies.