LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Costs associated with retinopathy of prematurity: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives To review and analyse evidence regarding costs for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening, lifetime costs and resource use among infants born preterm who develop ROP, and how these costs… Click to show full abstract

Objectives To review and analyse evidence regarding costs for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening, lifetime costs and resource use among infants born preterm who develop ROP, and how these costs have developed over time in different regions. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis Data sources PubMed and Scopus from inception to 23 June 2021. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Included studies presented costs for ROP screening and the lifetime costs (including laser treatment and follow-up costs) and resource use among people who develop ROP. Studies not reporting on cost calculation methods or ROP-specific costs were excluded. Data extraction and synthesis Two independent reviewers screened for inclusion and extracted data, including items from a published checklist for quality assessment used for bias assessment, summary and random-effects meta-analysis for treatment costs. Included studies were further searched to identify eligible references and citations. Results In total, 15 studies reported ROP screening costs, and 13 reported lifetime costs (either treatment and/or follow-up costs) for infants with ROP. The range for screening costs (10 studies) was US$5–US$253 per visit, or US$324–US$1072 per screened child (5 studies). Costs for treatment (11 studies) ranged from US$38 to US$6500 per child. Four studies reported healthcare follow-up costs (lifetime costs ranging from US$64 to US$2420, and 10-year costs of US$1695, respectively), and of these, three also reported lifetime costs for blindness (range US$26 686–US$224 295) using secondary cost data. Included papers largely followed the quality assessment checklist items, thus indicating a low risk of bias. Conclusion The costs of screening for and treating ROP are small compared with the societal costs of resulting blindness. However, little evidence is available for predicting the effects of changes in patient population, screening schedule or ROP treatments. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020208213.

Keywords: review meta; meta analysis; lifetime costs; systematic review; retinopathy prematurity

Journal Title: BMJ Open
Year Published: 2022

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.