United States Cost-Effectiveness Study of Two Dry Eye Ophthalmic Lubricants

Abstract

Purpose: Dry eye is thought to be the most common ocular problem in the United States. However, it is only recently that it has been recognized as a disease with significant economic burden and impact on quality of life. This article presents an economic model of cost-effectiveness of two ophthalmic lubricants commonly used in the treatment of dry eye—Systane® and Refresh Tears.® Method: We conducted a meta-analysis, pooling the results of two clinical trials of patients with dry eye treated with Systane® and Refresh Tears® which presented response rates for improvements in ocular dryness, the key symptom of dry eye. An economic model was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for Systane® versus Refresh Tears® over a 12 month treatment period. Results: Systane® is significantly more effective than Refresh Tears® at improving symptoms of “dryness” (75% vs 41%). Systane® costs on average $57.79 per year more than Refresh Tears.® Assigning a quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gain of 0.03 to responders results in an incremental cost per QALY gain of $5,837. Conclusion: Both Refresh Tears® and Systane® are effective and cost-effective interventions. Systane® costs more than Refresh Tears,® however clinical trial evidence shows it to be more effective. The ICER for Systane® versus Refresh Tears® is well below the generally accepted $50,000 per QALY threshold.

Keywords:

• Dry eye
• Systane®
• cost effectiveness
• QALY