MedPath

Cost-effectiveness of ISBCS vs. DSBCS

Not Applicable
Completed
Conditions
Bilateral Cataract
Interventions
Procedure: DSBCS
Procedure: ISBCS
Registration Number
NCT03400124
Lead Sponsor
Maastricht University Medical Center
Brief Summary

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and costs of immediately sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS) compared to delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery (DSBCS) in order to determine whether ISBCS is an effective and cost-effective alternative to DSBCS.

Detailed Description

With an estimated number of 180,000 cataract extractions per year in the Netherlands, cataract surgery is one of the most frequently performed types of surgery. The majority of patients suffer from bilateral cataract and while cataract surgery of one eye is effective in restoring functional vision, second-eye surgery leads to further improvement in health-related quality of life.

Currently, most patients undergo cataract surgery in both eyes on separate days as recommended in national guidelines, referred to as delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery (DSBCS). An alternative procedure involves cataract surgery of both eyes on the same day, but as separate procedures, known as immediately sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS).

Potential benefits of ISBCS include less time between surgeries, a faster total recovery period and lower costs. Potential risks, however, are complications of cataract surgery in general, most importantly the risk of endophthalmitis and refractive surprise. In ISBCS, both eyes are at risk at the same time, while in DSBCS both eyes are exposed to these risks consecutively.

Since there is no consensus yet about the role of ISBCS in current regular practice, further investigation of functional and surgical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of ISBCS compared to DSBCS is required. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and costs of ISBCS compared to DSBCS, in order to determine whether ISBCS is an effective and cost-effective alternative to DSBCS.

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
COMPLETED
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
858
Inclusion Criteria
  • Bilateral cataract
  • Indication for bilateral cataract surgery
  • Expected uncomplicated surgery
Exclusion Criteria
  • Inability to comply with study procedures or to complete follow-up / Dutch questionnaires.
  • Non-routine cataract surgery
  • Cognitive or behavioural conditions that might interfere with surgery
  • Cataract surgery with premium IOL implantation
  • Conditions that increase the risk of endophthalmitis (e.g. current ocular/adnexal/periocular infections, immune-compromised, iodine allergy)
  • Factors that increase the risk of refractive surprise (e.g. axial lengths <21mm or >27mm, difference between eyes of >1.5mm, abnormal keratometry readings, previous refractive surgery)
  • Conditions that increase the risk of corneal edema
  • Factors that increase the risk of complicated surgery (e.g. previous surgery, trauma, anatomical abnormalities)
  • Sight-threatening comorbidity, Glaucoma or IOP > 24mmHg, Uveitis, Diabetes with diabetic retinopathy and macular edema

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
DSBCSDSBCSThe usual care / control group will undergo cataract surgery of both eyes on separate days, with a time period of at least two weeks between surgeries (DSBCS).
ISBCSISBCSThe intervention group will undergo cataract surgery of both eyes on the same day (ISBCS)
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Refraction: deviation of 1.0 D from target refractionFour weeks post-operatively

Proportion of patients in both treatment groups with a postoperative refraction in the second eye that deviates 1.0 diopters (D) from target refraction

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs)Baseline until 3 months postoperatively

Calculated based on generic health-related quality of life, using the EQ-5D-5L and HUI-3 questionnaires

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs): NEI VFQ-25Baseline and 3 months postoperatively

Patient satisfaction and vision-specific quality of life as measured by National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25).

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs): EQ-5D-5LBaseline, 1,4 weeks and 3 months postoperatively

Health-related quality of life as measured by EQ-5D-5L questionnaire.

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs): Visual acuityBaseline until 3 months postoperatively

Calculated costs per patient with clinical improvement in (un)corrected distance visual acuity

ComplicationsIntraoperatively and up to 4 weeks after second-eye surgery

The incidence of intraoperative and postoperative complications

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs): HUI3Baseline, 1,4 weeks and 3 months postoperatively

Health-related quality of life as measured by HUI3 (Health Utility Index Mark 3) questionnaire.

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs): QALYBaseline until 3 months postoperatively

Evaluation of cost-effectiveness by using calculated costs per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)

Budget impactBaseline until 3 months postoperatively

Reported as a difference in costs. Different scenario's will be compared to investigate the impact of various levels of implementation (e.g. 25%, 50%, 75% of eligible patients).

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs): NEI VFQ-25Baseline until 3 months postoperatively

Calculated costs per clinically improved patient on the NEI VFQ-25 questionnaire

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs): CatquestBaseline until 3 months postoperatively

Calculated costs per clinically improved patient on the Catquest questionnaire

Refraction: deviation of 0.5 D from target refractionFour weeks post-operatively

Proportion of patients in both treatment groups with a postoperative refraction in the second eye that deviates 0.5 diopters (D) from target refraction

Change in visual acuityBaseline, 1 week after first-eye surgery and 4 weeks after second-eye surgery

Visual acuity will be measured by ETDRS letter charts

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs): CatquestBaseline and 3 months postoperatively

Patient satisfaction and vision-specific quality of life as measured by Catquest questionnaire.

Costs per patientBaseline until 3 months postoperatively

Cost per patient, including valuation of resource use by using the Dutch guidelines for cost-analyses or cost prices provided by the medical center.

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs): Target refractionBaseline until 3 months postoperatively

Calculated costs per patient with a postoperative refraction within 1.0 D of target refraction

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+)

🇳🇱

Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath