A comparison of the cost effectiveness of SMILE, LASIK, and PRK for treating myopia in a private eye center in Spain

Session Details

Session Title: Moderated Poster Session: Refractive Surgery: Can Results Improve Even Further?

Venue: Poster Village: Pod 2

First Author: : M.Balgos SPAIN

Co Author(s): :    D. Piñero   J. Alio Del Barrio   M. Canto-Cerdan   J. Alió              

Abstract Details

Purpose:

This paper aims to present the cost effectiveness of three laser refractive procedures for treating myopia – namely Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE), Laser Assisted in Situ Keratomileusis (LASIK) and Photorefractive Keratectomy (PRK).

Setting:

Vissum Innovation, Alicante, Spain and Universidad Miguel Hernandez, Alicante, Spain

Methods:

This study involved a cost-utility analysis using a model derived from a private eye center. A number of variables were obtained – the income from the procedures, the annual amortization of the equipment used for each procedure, the annual maintenance cost of the equipment and consumables for each procedure, the quality-adjusted life years (QALY) as computed from the outcomes of each procedure in our center. An Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) was then computed – which is the difference in lifetime costs over the difference in lifetime health outcomes, divided by the incremental QALY gained.

Results:

The difference in QALYs for SMILE, LASIK, and PRK were not statistically significant. The ICER comparing LASIK to SMILE was 2000 euros/QALY gained. The ICER comparing LASIK to PRK was 2400 euros/QALY gained, and the ICER comparing SMILE to PRK was 2500 euros/QALY gained. While these are within the threshold range for evaluating health interventions in a high-income country like Spain, LASIK had the lowest ICER.

Conclusions:

LASIK is more cost-effective, compared with SMILE and PRK, in the treatment of myopia.

Financial Disclosure:

None