Cost-effectiveness of basic vision rehabilitation (The basic VRS-effect study): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of a basic vision rehabilitation service (basic-VRS) in Portugal. We designed a parallel group, randomised controlled trial whose aim is to compare the effects and costs of 'usual low vision care' with a 'basic-VRS intervention' on self-reported visual ability and other psychosocial and health-related quality-of-life outcomes. METHODS: The trial will recruit participants that meet the following inclusion criteria: (1) visual acuity between 0.4-1.0 logMAR in the better-seeing eye, (2) cause of vision loss is diabetic retinopathy or age-related macular degeneration, (3) 18 years or older and iv) live in the community (not in nursing homes or other type of institution). Participants will be randomised to one of the study arms consisting of immediate intervention and delayed intervention. The delayed intervention group will receive 'usual care' or no intervention in the first 12 weeks. Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity and retinal structure will be assessed during the study. RESULTS: The primary outcome measure is visual ability, which will be evaluated with the Massof Activity Inventory, we expect that the intervention will raise the overall person measure or visual ability. Reading, health-related quality-of-life, anxiety and depression and social support will be also assessed. The analysis will be undertaken on an intention-to-treat basis. A cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed to provide information about the cost per unit of utility. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the intervention we will adopt the perspective of the healthcare system. CONCLUSION: This study will provide additional evidence about the effects of basic-VRS on self-reported visual ability. Findings from this study should also contribute to better planning of low vision provision and, consequently, may contribute to reduce barriers to basic-VRS.

Association of Vision Loss With Hospital Use and Costs Among Older Adults.

Importance: Patients with vision loss who are hospitalized for common illnesses are often not identified as requiring special attention. This perception, however, may affect the outcomes, resource use, and costs for these individuals. Objective: To assess whether the mean hospitalization lengths of stay, readmission rates, and costs of hospitalization differed between individuals with vision loss and those without when they are hospitalized for similar medical conditions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This analysis of health care claims data used 2 sources: Medicare database and Clinformatics DataMart. Individuals with vision loss were matched 1:1 to those with no vision loss (NVL), on the basis of age, years from initial hospitalization, sex, race/ethnicity, urbanicity of residence, and overall health. Both groups had the same health insurance (Medicare or a commercial health plan), and all had been hospitalized for common illnesses. Vision loss was categorized as either partial vision loss (PVL) or severe vision loss (SVL). Data were analyzed from April 2015 through April 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcomes were lengths of stay, readmission rates, and health care costs during hospitalization and 90 days after discharge. Multivariable logistic and linear regression models were built to identify factors associated with these outcomes among the NVL, PVL, and SVL groups. Results: Among Medicare beneficiaries, 6165 individuals with NVL (with a mean [SD] age of 82.0 [8.3] years, and 3833 [62.2%] of whom were female) were matched to 6165 with vision loss. Of those with vision loss, 3401 (55.2%) had PVL and 2764 (44.8%) had SVL. In the Clinformatics DataMart database, 5929 individuals with NVL (with a mean [SD] age of 73.7 [15.1] years, and 3587 [60.5%] of whom were female) were matched to 5929 individuals with vision loss. Of the commercially insured enrollees with vision loss, 3515 (59.3%) had PVL and 2414 (40.7%) had SVL. Medicare enrollees with SVL, compared with those with NVL, had longer mean lengths of stay (6.48 vs 5.26 days), higher readmission rates (23.1% vs 18.7%), and higher hospitalization and 90-day postdischarge costs ($64 711 vs $61 060). Compared with those with NVL, Medicare beneficiaries with SVL had 4% longer length of stay (estimated ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.07; P = .02), 22% higher odds of readmission (odds ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.06-1.41; P = .007), and 12% higher costs (estimated cost ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.06-1.18; P < .001). Similar findings were obtained for those with commercial health insurance. When these findings were extrapolated to hospitalizations of patients with vision loss nationwide, an estimated amount of more than $500 million in additional costs annually were spent caring for these patients. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that opportunities for improving outcomes and reducing costs exist in addressing patients' vision loss and concomitant functional difficulties during hospitalization and thereafter.

[Blindness and social security in Italy: critical issues and proposals.] / La cecità civile in Italia: criticità e proposte.

In Italy, blindness and low vision are ruled by Law 138/2001: two categories of blindness (corresponding to the one in the current WHO classification), receiving economical remuneration, and three categories of low vision, not directly remunerated. The problem ensues that low vision patients, who better gain from rehabilitation, have no economical contribution to undergo such care pathways; moreover, in Italy the evaluation has not yet shifted from "visual function" to "functional vision", thus lacking a holistic evaluation of visual dysfunction impact on the patient's daily life skills. To quantify the visual function of the examinee, only subjective performance (visual acuity and/or visual field) is evaluated in accordance with Law 138/2001, thus paving the way to malingerers: the "false blinds" phenomenon has recently reached the media. The Authors suggest that a correlation between the individual anatomical picture of the pathology/ies and the visual performance, obtained in patients with similar lesions undergoing controlled clinical studies reported in the ophthalmological literature, could offer more objective values to quantify the visual function.

Economic Evaluation of Low-Vision Rehabilitation for Veterans With Macular Diseases in the US Department of Veterans Affairs.

Importance: Examining costs and consequences of different low-vision (LV) programs provides important information about resources needed to expand treatment options efficiently. Objective: To examine the costs and consequences of LV rehabilitation or basic LV services. Design, Setting, and Participants: The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Low Vision Intervention Trial (LOVIT) II was conducted from September 27, 2010, to July 31, 2014, at 9 VA facilities and included 323 veterans with macular diseases and a best-corrected distance visual acuity of 20/50 to 20/200. Veterans were randomized to receive basic LV services that provided LV devices without therapy, or LV rehabilitation that added a therapist to LV services who provided instruction and homework on using LV devices, eccentric viewing, and environmental modification. We compared costs and consequences between these groups. Interventions: Low-vision devices without therapy and LV devices with therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Costs of providing basic LV services or LV rehabilitation were assessed. We measured consequences as changes in functional visual ability from baseline to follow-up 4 months after randomization using the VA Low Vision Visual Functioning Questionnaire. Visual ability was measured in dimensionless log odds units (logits). Results: Of 323 randomized patients, the mean (SD) age was 80 (10.5) years, 314 (97.2%) were men, and 292 (90.4%) were white. One hundred sixty (49.5%) received basic LV services and 163 (50.1%) received LV rehabilitation. The mean (SD) total direct health care costs per patient were similar between patients who were randomized to receive basic LV services ($1662 [$671]) or LV rehabilitation ($1788 [$864]) (basic LV services, $126 lower; 95% CI, $299 lower to $35 higher; P = .15). However, basic LV services required less time and had lower transportation costs. Patients receiving LV rehabilitation had greater improvements in overall visual ability, reading ability, visual information processing, and visual motor skill scores.

The National Eye Survey of Trinidad and Tobago (NESTT): Rationale, Objectives and Methodology.

PURPOSE: This paper describes the rationale, study design and procedures of the National Eye Survey of Trinidad and Tobago (NESTT). The main objective of this survey is to obtain prevalence estimates of vision impairment and blindness for planning and policy development. METHODS: A population-based, cross-sectional survey was undertaken using random multistage cluster sampling, with probability-proportionate-to-size methods. Eligible participants aged 5 years and older were sampled from the non-institutional population in each of 120 cluster segments. Presenting distance and near visual acuity were screened in their communities. People aged 40 years and older, and selected younger people, were invited for comprehensive clinic assessment. The interview included information on potential risk factors for vision loss, associated costs and quality of life. The examination included measurement of anthropometrics, blood glucose, refraction, ocular biometry, corneal hysteresis, and detailed assessment of the anterior and posterior segments, with photography and optical coherence tomography imaging. Adult participants were invited to donate saliva samples for DNA extraction and storage. RESULTS: The fieldwork was conducted over 13 months in 2013-2014. A representative sample of 10,651 individuals in 3410 households within 120 cluster segments identified 9913 people who were eligible for recruitment. CONCLUSION: The study methodology was robust and adequate to provide the first population-based estimates of the prevalence and causes of visual impairment and blindness in Trinidad and Tobago. Information was also gathered on risk factors, costs and quality of life associated with vision loss, and on normal ocular parameters for the population aged 40 years and older.

A Simple Method for Estimating the Economic Cost of Productivity Loss Due to Blindness and Moderate to Severe Visual Impairment.

PURPOSE: To estimate the annual loss of productivity from blindness and moderate to severe visual impairment (MSVI) using simple models (analogous to how a rapid assessment model relates to a comprehensive model) based on minimum wage (MW) and gross national income (GNI) per capita (US$, 2011). METHODS: Cost of blindness (COB) was calculated for the age group ≥50 years in nine sample countries by assuming the loss of current MW and loss of GNI per capita. It was assumed that all individuals work until 65 years old and that half of visual impairment prevalent in the ≥50 years age group is prevalent in the 50-64 years age group. For cost of MSVI (COMSVI), individual wage and GNI loss of 30% was assumed. Results were compared with the values of the uncorrected refractive error (URE) model of productivity loss. RESULTS: COB (MW method) ranged from $0.1 billion in Honduras to $2.5 billion in the United States, and COMSVI ranged from $0.1 billion in Honduras to $5.3 billion in the US. COB (GNI method) ranged from $0.1 million in Honduras to $7.8 billion in the US, and COMSVI ranged from $0.1 billion in Honduras to $16.5 billion in the US. Most GNI method values were near equivalent to those of the URE model. CONCLUSION: Although most people with blindness and MSVI live in developing countries, the highest productivity losses are in high income countries. The global economy could improve if eye care were made more accessible and more affordable to all.

A multicenter prospective cohort study of quality of life and economic outcomes after cataract surgery in Vietnam: the VISIONARY study.

PURPOSE: To measure the change in quality of life and economic circumstances after cataract surgery and identify the predictors of an improvement in these outcomes. DESIGN: A multicenter, prospective, longitudinal cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Participants aged 18 years were recruited to the study if the clinical assessment of their best uncorrected vision was <= 6/18 in the better eye because of cataract [Corrected]. METHODS: Cataract surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Data were collected on quality of life and a multidimensional assessment of household economic circumstances (work status, income, asset ownership, household economic hardship, and catastrophic health expenditure). RESULTS: At 12 months follow-up, 381 of 480 participants were re-interviewed, and all had undergone surgery. There was a significant improvement in quality of life. Household economic circumstances also improved (mean change paid work participation/month: 44.5 hours, P < 0.0001; mean change unpaid work participation/month: 89.5 hours, P < 0.0001; change in proportion with hardship: -17%, P < 0.0001; and change in proportion with catastrophic health expenditure: -7%, P = 0.02). Improvements were most likely in near-poor households and were related to the type of surgery and complications after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This research showed that cataract surgery is associated with meaningful improvements in quality of life and household economic circumstances that are indicative of positive transitions out of poverty. Given the unmet need for cataract surgery in low- and middle-income countries where cataract impairment is substantial, this research demonstrates the potential of a relatively simple, low-cost health intervention to greatly improve household economic circumstances.

The economic burden of vision loss and eye disorders among the United States population younger than 40 years.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the economic burden of vision loss and eye disorders in the United States population younger than 40 years in 2012. DESIGN: Econometric and statistical analysis of survey, commercial claims, and census data. PARTICIPANTS: The United States population younger than 40 years in 2012. METHODS: We categorized costs based on consensus guidelines. We estimated medical costs attributable to diagnosed eye-related disorders, undiagnosed vision loss, and medical vision aids using Medical Expenditure Panel Survey and MarketScan data. The prevalence of vision impairment and blindness were estimated using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data. We estimated costs from lost productivity using Survey of Income and Program Participation. We estimated costs of informal care, low vision aids, special education, school screening, government spending, and transfer payments based on published estimates and federal budgets. We estimated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) lost based on published utility values. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs and QALYs lost in 2012. RESULTS: The economic burden of vision loss and eye disorders among the United States population younger than 40 years was $27.5 billion in 2012 (95% confidence interval, $21.5-$37.2 billion), including $5.9 billion for children and $21.6 billion for adults 18 to 39 years of age. Direct costs were $14.5 billion, including $7.3 billion in medical costs for diagnosed disorders, $4.9 billion in refraction correction, $0.5 billion in medical costs for undiagnosed vision loss, and $1.8 billion in other direct costs. Indirect costs were $13 billion, primarily because of $12.2 billion in productivity losses. In addition, vision loss cost society 215 000 QALYs. CONCLUSIONS: We found a substantial burden resulting from vision loss and eye disorders in the United States population younger than 40 years, a population excluded from previous studies. Monetizing quality-of-life losses at $50 000 per QALY would add $10.8 billion in additional costs, indicating a total economic burden of $38.2 billion. Relative to previously reported estimates for the population 40 years of age and older, more than one third of the total cost of vision loss and eye disorders may be incurred by persons younger than 40 years. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

Vision impairment and major causes of vision loss impacts on vision-specific functioning independent of socioeconomic factors.

PURPOSE: To quantify the eye disease-specific impact of unilateral and bilateral vision impairment (VI) on vision-specific functioning (VF). DESIGN: The Singapore Indian Eye population-based study. PARTICIPANTS: Ethnic Indians older than 40 years of age living in Singapore. METHODS: Participants underwent standardized ophthalmic assessments for VI and blindness, defined using presenting visual acuity (United States definition). Sociodemographic data were recorded using a standardized questionnaire. Rasch analysis was used to validate the Visual Function Index 11 and to determine its psychometric properties. The major causes of VI (i.e., cataract, refractive error, age-related macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy [DR], and glaucoma) were determined by ophthalmologists on examination. Multivariate linear regression analysis was performed to assess the impact of VI on the overall VF Rasch score. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Vision-specific functioning. RESULTS: Three thousand three hundred ninety-six persons were analyzed. Participants with VI had a systematic reduction in VF score compared with those with normal vision in both eyes, ranging from -11.2% normal vision in one eye and low vision in the other eye (95% confidence interval [CI], -12.2% to -10.3%; P<0.001), to -12.7% blindness in one eye and normal vision in the other eye (CI, -15.1% to -10.4%; P<0.001), to -19.4% low vision in both eyes (CI, -20.8% to -18.1%; P<0.001), to -52.9% blindness in one eye and low vision in other eye (CI, -55.3% to -50.4%; P<0.001), to -77.2% blindness in both eyes (CI, -82.4% to 72.0%; P<0.001). The impact of VI on VF score varied across different major causes of vision loss, regardless of socioeconomic factors. Vision impairment attributed to cataract in one or both eyes had a significant decrease in VF score by 17.7% and 22.3%, respectively, compared with those with normal vision in both eyes (P<0.001). The impact of unilateral and bilateral VI on VF score was greater in participants with glaucoma (32.2% in unilateral cases and 35.9% in bilateral cases; P<0.001) and DR (29.4% in unilateral cases and 33.3% in bilateral cases; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Vision impairment and major age-related eye diseases such as cataract, DR, and glaucoma are associated significantly with worse deterioration in VF, regardless of education level, literacy adequacy, or immigration pattern. Glaucoma and DR seemed to have a greater negative impact on VF score compared with cataract. This study highlights the importance of disease-specific interventions in reducing the adverse impact of VI on daily activities.

What the comprehensive economics of blindness and visual impairment can help us understand.

Since the year 2000, the amount written about the economics of blindness and visual impairment has increased substantially. In some cases, the studies listed under this heading are calculations of the costs related to vision impairment and blindness at a national or global level; in other cases the studies examine the cost-effectiveness of strategies to prevent or modify visual impairment or blindness that are intended to be applied as a guide to treatment recommendations and coverage decisions. In each case the references are just examples of many that could be cited. These important studies have helped advocates, policy makers, practitioners, educators, and others interested in eye and vision health to understand the magnitude of the impact that visual impairment and blindness have on the world, regions, nations, and individuals and the tradeoffs that need to be made to limit the impact. However, these studies only begin to tap into the insights that economic logic might offer to those interested in this field. This paper presents multiple case studies that demonstrate that the economics of blindness and visual impairment encompasses much more than simply measures of the burden of the condition. Case studies demonstrating the usefulness of economic insight include analysis of the prevention of conditions that lead to impairment, decisions about refractive error and presbyopia, decisions about disease and injury treatment, decisions about behavior among those with uncorrectable impairment, and decisions about how to regulate the market all have important economic inputs.

VA LOVIT II: a protocol to compare low vision rehabilitation and basic low vision.

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of low vision rehabilitation (LVR) and basic low vision (LV) in a single masked multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: Three hundred and thirty patients eligible for US. Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare services with primary eye diagnosis (better-seeing eye) of macular disease and best-corrected distance visual acuity of 0.40-1.00 logMAR (6/15 to 6/60 or 20/50 to 20/200 Snellen) are being enrolled at seven VA facilities. All participants receive an optometric LV examination; and they are eligible to receive the same LV devices that are provided without charge. In LVR, a LV therapist dispenses devices and provides 2 or 3 (1½ to 2½ h) therapy sessions with assigned homework to teach effective use of remaining vision and LV devices. Contact time with the therapist depends upon the devices prescribed and the patient's progress in learning the skills that are taught. In basic LV, devices are dispensed by the optometrist without LV therapy. Contact time for dispensing is one hour or less depending on LV devices prescribed. The primary outcome measure is a comparison of the changes in visual reading ability (estimated from patients' difficulty ratings of reading items on the VA LV VFQ-48 questionnaire) between the treatment and control arms from pre-intervention baseline to 4 months (2 months after completion of treatment). Secondary outcome measures are changes in overall visual ability, visual ability domain scores calculated from subsets of items (mobility, visual information processing and visual motor skills), Short Form-36, and Minnesota Low Vision Reading Test scores. Cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted using VA LV VFQ-48 scores and QALYS computed from EuroQol scores. RESULTS: A total of 137 patients representing 41.5% of the study target of 330 patients were randomised from October 2010 to March 2012. Among those 137 patients, mean age was 80.2 (S.D. ± 9.9) years at enrollment; 97.1% of the patients were males; 94.2% were white. Mean best corrected VA was 0.65 (S.D. ± 0.3) logMAR (approximately Snellen 6/27 or 20/90) at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: LOVIT II is the first multicentre RCT comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of LVR and basic LV for patients with macular diseases and near normal or moderate levels of visual impairment.

The cost of vision loss in Canada. 1. Methodology.

OBJECTIVE: This paper outlines the methodology used to estimate the cost of vision loss in Canada. The results of this study will be presented in a second paper. DESIGN: The cost of vision loss (VL) in Canada was estimated using a prevalence-based approach. This was done by estimating the number of people with VL in a base period (2007) and the costs associated with treating them. The cost estimates included direct health system expenditures on eye conditions that cause VL, as well as other indirect financial costs such as productivity losses. Estimates were also made of the value of the loss of healthy life, measured in Disability Adjusted Life Years or DALY's. To estimate the number of cases of VL in the population, epidemiological data on prevalence rates were applied to population data. The number of cases of VL was stratified by gender, age, ethnicity, severity and cause. The following sources were used for estimating prevalence: Population-based eye studies; Canadian Surveys; Canadian journal articles and research studies; and International Population Based Eye Studies. Direct health costs were obtained primarily from Health Canada and Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) sources, while costs associated with productivity losses were based on employment information compiled by Statistics Canada and on economic theory of productivity loss. Costs related to vision rehabilitation (VR) were obtained from Canadian VR organizations. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that it is possible to estimate the costs for VL for a country in the absence of ongoing local epidemiological studies.

The cost of vision loss in Canada. 2. Results.

OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to provide the financial underpinnings necessary for effective planning for the provision of eye health services in Canada. Canada is facing an aging demographic and all the major eye diseases are diseases associated with aging. It is essential that we have information based on the best available data to support national and provincial vision health plans. DESIGN: The design associated with the prevalence-based approach used in this study was outlined previously in detail in The Cost of Vision Loss in Canada: Methodology. METHODS: The methods associated with the prevalence-based approach used in this study were previously outlined in detail in The Cost of Vision Loss in Canada: Methodology. RESULTS: The financial cost of VL in Canada in 2007 was estimated to be $15.8 billion per annum: $8.6 billion (54.6%) represents direct health system expenditure; $4.4 billion (28.0%) was productivity lost due to lower employment, higher absenteeism, and premature death of Canadians with VL; $1.8 billion (11.1%) was the dead weight losses (DWL) from transfers including welfare payments and taxation forgone; $0.7 billion (4.4%) was the value of the care for people with VL; $305 million (1.9%) was other indirect costs such as aids and home modifications and the bring forward of funeral costs. Additionally, the value of the lost well-being (disability and premature death) was estimated at a further $11.7 billion. In per capita terms, this amounts to a financial cost of $19370 per person with VL per annum. Including the value of lost well-being, the cost is $33704 per person per annum. CONCLUSIONS: There is a growing awareness in Canada and around the world of the impact of VL on health costs and on the economy in general. This awareness is supported by the growing number of independent studies on the cost of vision loss both nationally and globally. Because most of these studies are limited by the minimal amount of available data, the overall cost of vision loss is likely underestimated. Nevertheless, this study reports the cost of vision loss in Canada as being greater than previously reported, making the problem even more urgent to address. A comprehensive national vision health plan, that is a coordinated federal, provincial and territorial initiative dealing with all aspects of vision loss prevention, sight restoration, and vision rehabilitation is called for.

Quality of life of the most severely vision-impaired.

BACKGROUND: To explore the interaction between vision impairment, perceived quality of life loss and willingness to trade remaining life for vision gain. DESIGN: Community-based cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Legally blind or severely vision-impaired people selected randomly from the Association for the Blind of Western Australia register. METHODS: Individuals were examined by consultant ophthalmologists and completed the Impact of Vision Impairment profile quality of life assessment and a Time Trade-Off evaluation. Vision-related utility values were calculated. The results were analysed using univariate and multivariate regression methods. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: IVI Rasch Logits and TTO utility values (TTO UV). RESULTS: 156 people volunteered to contribute to the study. The median age was 80 (19-97) years, and 56% were female. Being legally blind (logMAR > 1) (95% CI 1.1 to 5.2, P = 0.003), clinically depressed (95% CI -11.2 to -1.8, P = 0.007) or more than 40 years of age (95% CI 0.9 to 8.1, P = 0.015) significantly lowered overall impact of vision impairment scores. The emotional domain of impact of vision impairment was associated with willingness to trade part of remaining life. A 5-Logit increase in impact of vision impairment emotional score resulted in a 21% (95% CI 10 to 31) decrease in the odds of being likely to trade life for sight. The Australian definition of blindness compared with World Health Organisation or USA best separates those with perceived loss and appears useful in identifying vision loss-related morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that emotional health and lack of depression are important determinants for quality and value of life.

Economic cost of visual impairment in Japan.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the total economic cost of visual impairment in Japan. METHODS: A prevalence-based approach was adopted using data on visual impairment, the national health system, and indirect costs to capture the economic impact of visual impairment in 2007. RESULTS: In 2007, visual impairment affected more than 1.64 million people in Japan and cost around yen 8785.4 billion (US $72.8 billion) across the economy, equivalent to 1.7% of Japan's gross domestic product. The loss of well-being (years of life lost from disability and premature mortality) cost yen 5863.6 billion (US $48.6 billion). Direct health system costs were yen 1338.2 billion (US $11.1 billion). Other financial costs were yen 1583.5 billion (US $13.1 billion), including productivity losses, care takers' costs, and efficiency losses from welfare payments and taxes. Community care was the largest component of other financial costs and was composed of paid and unpaid services that provide home and personal care to people with visual impairment. The findings of this study are in line with those of similar studies in Australia and the United States. CONCLUSIONS: Visual impairment imposes substantial costs on society, particularly to individuals with visual impairment and their families. Eliminating or reducing disabilities from visual impairment through public awareness of preventive care, early diagnosis, more intensive disease treatment, and new medical technologies could significantly improve the quality of life for people with visual impairment and their families, while also potentially reducing national health care expenditure and increasing productivity in Japan. The results of this study should provide a first step in helping policymakers evaluate policy effects and to prioritize research expenditures.

The cost of care for people with impaired vision in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To prospectively collect data on the providers, types, and costs of care for people with impaired vision in Australia. METHODS: Adults with impaired vision, visual acuity worse than 20/40, were recruited from clinics, vision rehabilitation agencies, and support groups. Participants completed daily diaries for 12 months, entering information on the amount of time they used caregivers and providers and types of care. Demographic information was obtained from questionnaires. The cost of care was calculated using mean hourly wage rates. RESULTS: The mean age of the 114 participants was 66.5 years (standard deviation [SD], 19.7) with 64% of participants female; 105 of 114 participants relied on a caregiver at least once during the 12 months. The mean amount of yearly caregiver time used was 152.2 hours (SD, 193; median, 81.3; range, 1-851 hours). The median time represents 4.6% of a working week. There were no significant associations of age, sex, type, or place of residence with the amount of care received (P > or = .1). As most of the caregivers were family members who assisted with transport, written communications, and personal affairs, the "opportunity costs" were calculated. The median annual opportunity cost was A$915 (US $710) (range, $A0-$9653 [US $0-$7491]). CONCLUSIONS: This study prospectively obtained data for the cost of caregivers for people with impaired vision. The degree of vision impairment was not associated with the amount of care used but showed a threshold effect: when vision is impaired to the extent that people cannot legally hold a driver's license, reliance on caregivers appears to be independent of the severity of loss of vision.

Medical care cost of Medicare/Medicaid beneficiaries with vision loss.

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of vision loss on healthcare cost for patients with Medicaid and Medicare and whether these costs are adequately captured by Medicare hierarchical condition categories (HCC) risk adjustment methodology. DATA SOURCES: The public use data set of the Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) for 1994-1998, and the Medicare 5% Sample datasets for 2003 and 2004. METHODS: For the first analysis, up to five years of PACE data for each individual was used to calculate HCC scores (n = 3,459). For the second analysis, claim or encounter data from Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) and Medicare Advantage (MA) were used to estimate the cost for each beneficiary in the upcoming payment year (n = 2,108). RESULTS: The increase in medical cost risk overall for visually impaired PACE participants was 10%, increasing to 13% for the non-institutionalized, community-based cohort, but PACE participants in nursing homes with vision loss did not generally result in increased costs. In the Medicare 5% sample, the HCC model under-predicts costs by about 17%. CONCLUSION: Our analyses provide evidence that healthcare cost risk attributable to vision loss is not adequately captured by Medicare HCC risk adjustment methodology. We hypothesize this is due to additional morbidity and treatment patterns associated with visual impairment.

Costs of vision impairment in childhood and youth: diary case studies.

PURPOSE: Children and youth with vision impairment face a lifetime of vision-related costs. This paper examines the little-known personal costs incurred in these early years. METHODS: Case studies of three children and one youth with vision impairment were extracted from a larger, diary-based prospective study of the personal expenditure of people with vision impairment. Diaries were maintained over a 12 month period and expenditure and resource utilization were recorded under four main headings: medicines, products and equipment; health and community services; informal care and support; and other expenses. RESULTS: The scale of direct and indirect costs incurred differed by age at onset and duration of vision impairment. The highest personal costs were accrued for equipment. Informal care and support accounted for the highest indirect costs listed. Reliance on family meant that opportunity costs of relatives rather than out-of-pocket personal costs applied. Assistance from family members was consistently required in relation to transport, personal affairs, and reading-related tasks. Minimal costs were recorded for medicines. Usage of low vision services was commonplace, reflecting the cost-free availability of low vision rehabilitation and support services for children and youths in Australia. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study draws attention to the complexity of factors that need to be considered when calculating the personal costs of vision impairment. Cross case comparisons showed that some personal costs were recurrent, others sporadic or once-off. By highlighting the role that age, onset and duration of vision loss, life/educational stage and lifestyle played in differentiating costs between case study participants, these diaries represent important formative work that can guide future research in this area.