ArticleHealth services insights2025
Remote Eye Triage: Health Economic Perspectives on Resource Prioritization.
Article in Health services insights, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The TeleTriageTeam (TTT) is a novel system for remote eyecare delivery. Objectives: Explores the impact of TTT on costs by depicting program theory of care prioritization. Moreover, a quantification of longer-term effects of delay (and inversely earlier treatment) on costs is performed. Design: Mixed-methods health economic evaluation. Methods: First, we depicted the program theory of prioritization into a LOGIC-model using existing TTT-data and expert interviews outlining the causal pathways how and why a program is expected to work. Second, we identified the most relevant key diagnoses to be appraised based on incidence, severity, and presumed triage impact. Third, we estimated the impact of delay (or inversely earlier treatment) on societal costs and quality of life (QoL) based on literature searches. Cost data were updated to 2023. Results were reported per delayed patient per 6 months (the average TTT delay). Results: Five key diagnoses were selected: cataract, diabetic retinopathy (DRP), age-related macular disease (AMD), glaucoma, and dry-eye-syndrome (DES). The LOGIC-model showed how the TTT actions could influence costs and QoL. Semi-structured interviews revealed delay results in adverse events, at the expense of shorter waiting times in prioritized patients, and overall decreases personnel burden. Reduced waiting times were also believed to decrease burden and costs in prioritized patients. Literature showed that a delay in glaucoma treatment results in savings (-€409), while the other diagnoses suggested higher societal costs (cataract €3298, DES €2156, AMD €1455, DRP €117). QoL reduction and increased costs due to delay were more apparent when delay results in longer duration of curable symptoms compared to delay in stable disease (up to 0.09 vs 0.003 QALYs and €3298 vs €1455, respectively). Conclusions: Eye care delay results reduced QoL and increased societal costs, yet this is compounded by gains attributable to justified prioritization of more urgent and more severe patients.
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.