4.5 Article

Retinopathy of prematurity: the high cost of screening regional and remote infants

Journal

CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 46, Issue 6, Pages 645-651

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ceo.13160

Keywords

retinopathy of prematurity; screening; telemedicine

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ImportanceDemand for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening is increasing for infants born at rural and regional hospitals where the service is not generally available. The health system cost for screening regional/remote infants has not been reported. BackgroundThe objective of this study is to evaluate the cost of ROP screening at a large centralized tertiary neonatal service for infants from regional/rural hospitals. DesignThis is a retrospective study to establish the cost of transferring regional/rural infants to the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital for ROP screening over a 28-month period. ParticipantsA total of 131 infants were included in this study. MethodsIndividual infant costs were calculated from analysis of clinical and administrative records. Main Outcome MeasuresEconomic cost of ROP screening for all transfers from regional/rural hospitals to Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital. ResultsThe average economic cost of ROP screening for this cohort was AUD$5110 per infant screened and the total cost was AUD$669 413. The average cost per infant screened was highest for infants from a regional centre with a population of 75 000 (AUD$14 856 per child), which was also geographically furthest from Brisbane. No infant in this cohort transferred from a regional nursery reached criteria for intervention for ROP by standard guidelines. Conclusions and RelevanceHealth system costs for ROP screening of remote infants at a centralized hospital are high. Alternative strategies using telemedicine can now be compared with centralized screening.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available