Time-trend and variations in the proportion of second-eye cataract surgery

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Despite recommendations for greater use of second-eye cataract surgery and the bilateral progression of the disease, there is a substantial proportion of unmet need for this treatment. Few studies have explored the factors associated with second-eye cataract surgery utilisation. The objective of our study was to estimate the proportion of second-eye cataract surgery, evaluate its time-trend, and explore differences in utilisation by patients' gender, age, and region of residence.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>All senile cataract surgeries performed between 1999 and 2002 in the public health system of Catalonia (Spain) were obtained from the Minimum Data Set. The proportion of second-eye surgery from November 2000 to December 2002 was calculated. The time-trend of this proportion was characterised through linear regression models with the logarithmic transformation of time.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The proportion of second-eye surgery was 30.0% and showed an increasing trend from 24.8% (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 21.6; 26.1) in November 2000 to 31.8% (95% CI 31.4; 33.6) in December 2002. This proportion was 1.9% (95% CI 0.9; 2.9) higher in women (p < 0.001) and held constant across time. Male patients aged less than 60 had the lowest proportion (22.6%; 95% CI 22.4; 22.9) and females between 70 and 79 had the highest proportion (27.4%; 95% CI 26.9; 27.9). The time-trend for the proportion of second-eye surgery in those aged over 80 years was greater than for younger ages, showing an increase of 9% at the end of the period for both males and females. Variations between regions decreased over time because regions with the lowest initial proportions of second-eye surgery (approximately 17%) showed a greater increase over the study period.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We predict greater utilization of second-eye surgery in patients aged 70 to 79 years and in women. A greater increase in the utilisation rates of second-eye surgery is expected in the regions with lower proportions and in older patients. The observed trend suggests that there will be a substantial proportion of unmet need for bilateral surgery.</p

Geographical variations in the benefit of applying a prioritization system for cataract surgery in different regions of Spain

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In Spain, there are substantial variations in the utilization of health resources among regions. Because the need for surgery differs in patients with appropriate surgical indication, introducing a prioritization system might be beneficial. Our objective was to assess geographical variations in the impact of applying a prioritization system in patients on the waiting list for cataract surgery in different regions of Spain by using a discrete-event simulation model.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A discrete-event simulation model to evaluate demand and waiting time for cataract surgery was constructed. The model was reproduced and validated in five regions of Spain and was fed administrative data (population census, surgery rates, waiting list information) and data from research studies (incidence of cataract). The benefit of introducing a prioritization system was contrasted with the usual first-in, first-out (FIFO) discipline. The prioritization system included clinical, functional and social criteria. Priority scores ranged between 0 and 100, with greater values indicating higher priority. The measure of results was the waiting time weighted by the priority score of each patient who had passed through the waiting list. Benefit was calculated as the difference in time weighted by priority score between operating according to waiting time or to priority.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The mean waiting time for patients undergoing surgery according to the FIFO discipline varied from 1.97 months (95% CI 1.85; 2.09) in the Basque Country to 10.02 months (95% CI 9.91; 10.12) in the Canary Islands. When the prioritization system was applied, the mean waiting time was reduced to a minimum of 0.73 months weighted by priority score (95% CI 0.68; 0.78) in the Basque Country and a maximum of 5.63 months (95% CI 5.57; 5.69) in the Canary Islands. The waiting time weighted by priority score saved by the prioritization system varied from 1.12 months (95% CI 1.07; 1.16) in Andalusia to 2.73 months (95% CI 2.67; 2.80) in Aragon.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The prioritization system reduced the impact of the variations found among the regions studied, thus improving equity. Prioritization allocates the available resources within each region more efficiently and reduces the waiting time of patients with greater need. Prioritization was more beneficial than allocating surgery by waiting time alone.</p