ArticleThe British and Irish orthoptic journal2023
Cost Analysis of Orthoptist-Led Neurofibromatosis Type 1 Screening Clinics.
Article in The British and Irish orthoptic journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To conduct a costing study comparing orthoptist-led with consultant-led clinics screening for optic pathway gliomas (OPGs) in children with neurofibromatosis Type 1 (NF1) attending the Royal Children's Hospital (RCH), Melbourne. Methods: Patients with NF1 examined in the orthoptist-led NF1 screening clinic and/or consultant-led clinics during the study period were identified. The workflow management software Q-Flow 6® provided data documenting patient's time spent with the orthoptist, nurse, and ophthalmologist. Time points were converted into minutes and multiplied by the cost-per-minute for each profession. A bottom-up micro-costing approach was used to estimate appointment level costs. Bootstrap simulations with 1000 replications were used to estimate 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the difference in mean appointment time and cost between clinics. Results: Data for 130 consultant-led clinic appointments and 234 orthoptist-led clinic appointments were extracted for analysis. The mean time per appointment for the consultant-led clinic was 45.11 minutes, and the mean time per appointment for the orthoptist-led clinic was 25.85 minutes. The mean cost per appointment for the consultant-led clinic was A $84.15 (GBP £39.60) compared to the orthoptist-led clinic at A $20.40 (GBP £9.60). This represents a mean reduction of 19.25 minutes per appointment (95% CI, -24.85 to -13.66) and a mean reduction of A $63.75 (GBP £30.00) per appointment (95% CI, (A $-75.40 to $-52.10 [GBP £ -35.48 to £ -24.52]). Conclusion: An orthoptist-led clinic screening for OPGs in patients with NF1 can be a more cost-efficient model of care for ophthalmic screening in this patient group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.