The cost-effectiveness of various modes of screening for primary open angle glaucoma

References

• Hollows F C, Graham P A. Intra-ocular pressure, glaucoma, and glaucoma suspects in a denned population. Br J Ophthalmol 1966; 50: 570–86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bankes J LK, Perkins E S, Tsoliakis S, Wright J E. Bedford glaucoma survey. Br Med J 1968; 1: 791–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leibowitz H M, Krueger D E, Maunder L R, et al. The Framingham Eye Study monograph. Surv Ophthalmol 1980; 24(suppl)335–610
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tielsch J M, Sommer A, Katz J, et al. Racial variations in the prevalence of primary open angle glaucoma. JAMA 1991; 266: 369–74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson J M, Rosenthal A R, Lavery J. A study of the prevalence of eye disease in the elderly in an English community. Trans Ophthalmol Soc UK 1985; 104: 196–203
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Martinez G S, Campbell A J, Reinken J, Allan B C. Prevalence of ocular disease in a population study of subjects 65 years and older. Am J Ophthalmol 1982; 94: 181–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bengtsson B. The prevalence of glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 1981; 65: 46–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bengtsson B. Manifest glaucoma in the aged I. Occurrence nine years after a population survey. Acta Ophthalmol (Kbh) 1981; 59: 321–31
   Google Scholar
• Klein B EK, Klein R, Sponsel W E, Franke T, Cantor L B, Martone J, et al. Prevalence of glaucoma. The Beaver Dam Eye Study. Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 1499–1504
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coffey M, Reidy A, Wormald R, Xian W X, Wright L, Courtney P. Prevalence of glaucoma in the West of Ireland. Br J Ophthalmol 1993; 77: 17–21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dielmans I, Vingerling J R, Wolfs R CW, Hofman A, Grobee D E, De Jong P TVM. The prevalence of POAG in a population based study in the Netherlands. Ophthalmology 1994; 101: 1851–5
   Google Scholar
• Leske M C. The epidemiology of open angle glaucoma: a review. Am J Epidemiol 1983; 118: 166–91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of Health and Social Security. Blindness and partial sight in England 1969–1976. Reports on Public Health and Medical Subjects No. 129. HMSO, London 1978
   Google Scholar
• Ghatour I M, Allan D, Foulds W. Common causes of blindness and visual handicap in the West of Scotland. Br J Ophthalmol 1983; 67: 209–13
   Google Scholar
• Fuchs J, Nissen K R, Goldschmidt E. Glaucoma blindness in Denmark. Acta Ophthalmol (Kbh) 1992; 70: 73–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tielsch J M, Katz J, Singh K, et al. A population-based evaluation of glaucoma screening: the Baltimore Eye Survey. Am J Epidemiol 1991; 134: 1102–10
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson R, Walker A M, Dueker D K, Crick R P. Risk factors for rate of progression of glaucomatous visual field loss: a computer based analysis. Arch Ophthalmol 1982; 100: 737–41
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogel R, Crick R P, Newson R B, Shipley M, Blackmore H, Bulpitt C J. Association between intraocular pressure and loss of visual field in chronic simple glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 1990; 74: 3–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grant W M, Burke J F. Why do some people go blind from glaucoma. Ophthalmology 1982; 89: 991–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jay J L, Murdoch J R. The rates of visual field loss in untreated primary open angle glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 1993; 77: 176–8
   Google Scholar
• Gottlieb L K, Schwartz B, Pauker S G. Glaucoma screening. A cost effectiveness analysis. Surv Ophthalmol 1983; 28: 206–26
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Worthen D M. Economic aspects of the management of ocular hypertension. Surv Ophthalmol 1980; 25: 206–14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eddy D M, Sanders L E, Eddy J F. The value of screening for glaucoma with tonometry. Surv Ophthalmol 1983; 28: 194–205
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones S J, Vernon S A, Cater L, Henry D J. Costing a community based screening programme for the detection of glaucoma. Eye 1990; 4: 98–102
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson M R, Khanna S. The value of different screening techniques for glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 1994; 5(11)69–75
   Google Scholar
• Wormald R PI, Rauf A. Glaucoma screening. J Med Screening 1995; 2: 109–14
   Google Scholar
• Crick R P, Reynolds P M, Daubs J G. Epidemiological aspects of primary open-angle glaucoma. Glaucoma 1983; 5: 4–14
   Google Scholar
• Sommer A, Tielsch J M, Katz J, et al. Relationship between intraocular pressure and primary open angle glaucoma among white and black Americans. Arch Ophthalmol 1991; 109: 1090–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hitchings R A. Low tension glaucoma-is treatment worthwhile. Eye 1988; 2: 636–40
   Google Scholar
• Hitchings R A, Wu J, Poinoosawmy D, McNaught A. Surgery for normal tension glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 1995; 79: 402–6
   Google Scholar
• Trobe J D, Acosta P C, Schuster J J, Kri-scher J P. An evaluation of the accuracy of community based perimetry. Am J Ophthalmol 1980; 90: 654–60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keltner J L, Johnson C A. Screening for visual field abnormalities with automated perimetry. Surv Ophthalmol 1983; 28: 175–83
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Augsburger A, Alexander K L. Measurements of intraocular pressure with multiple non-contact tonometers. Am JOptom 1982; 59: 342–5
   Google Scholar
• Wood C M, Bosanquet R C. Limitations of direct ophthalmoscopy in screening forglaucoma. BrMedJ 1987; 291: 1587–8
   Google Scholar
• Varma R, Steinmann W C., Scott I U. Expert agreement in evaluating the optic disc for glaucoma. Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 215–21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atkinson P L., Wishart P K., James J N, Vernon S A, Reid F. Deterioration in the accuracy of the Pulsair non-contact tonometer with use: need for regular calibration. Eye 1992; 6: 530–4
   Google Scholar
• Vernon S A, Henry D J, Cater L, Jones S J. Screening for glaucoma in the community by non-ophthalmologically trained staff using semi-automated equipment. Eye 1990; 4: 89–97
   Google Scholar
• Office of Population Censuses and Surveys. OPCS Monitor PP188/1. HMSO, London August, 1988
   Google Scholar
• Damms T, Dannheim F. Sensitivity and specificity of optic disc parameters in chronic glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1995; 34: 2246–50
   Google Scholar
• Crick R P. Epidemiology and screening of open-angle glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 1994; 5: 3–9
   Google Scholar
• Davanger M, Ringvold A, Blika S. The probability of having glaucoma at different IOP levels. Acta Ophthalmol 1991; 69: 565–8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sommer A. Intraocular pressure and glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 1989; 107: 186–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henson D B, Bryson H. Clinical results with the Henson-Hamblin CFS 2000. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser 1987; 49: 233–8
   Google Scholar
• Knuth D E. The art of computer programming semi-numerical algorithms. Addison-Welsey, Reading, MA 1980
   Google Scholar
• Tielsch J M, Katz J, Sommer A, Quigley H A, Javitt M D. Family history and risk of primary open angle glaucoma. The xaltimore Eye Survey. Arch Ophthalmol 1994; 112: 69–73
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennett A G, Rabbetts R B. Clinical Visual Optics, 2nd ed. Butter-worth, London 1989; 485–501
   Google Scholar
• Daubs J G, Crick R R. Effect of refractive error on the risk of ocular hypertension and open angle glaucoma. Trans Oph-thal Soc UK 1981; 101: 121–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tomlinson A, French C N. The prediction of glaucoma from ocular biometric data. Am J Optom 1975; 52: 817–22
   Google Scholar
• Guidance on terminology. J Med Screening 1994; 1: 76
   Google Scholar
• Tuck M W, Crick R R. Relative effectiveness of different modes of glaucoma screening in optometric practice. Ophthal Physiol Opt 1993; 13: 227–32
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuck M W, Crick R R. Non-contact tonometry: optometrists' current practice in England and Wales. Ophthal Physiol Opt 1994; 14: 347–50
   Google Scholar
• Tuck M W, Crick R P. Screening for glaucoma: the time taken by primary examiners to conduct visual field tests in practice. Ophthal Physiol Opt 1994; 14: 351–5
   Google Scholar
• Survey report on the change in unit costs of sight tests between 1990 and 1992. Economists Advisory Group Ltd, London 1993
   Google Scholar
• French C N. Sight test times, domicilia-ries and child vision care. Optician 1987; 12: 28–33, June
   Google Scholar
• Sheldrick J H, Ng C, Austin D J, Rosenthal A R. An analysis of referral routes and diagnostic accuracy in cases of suspected glaucoma. Ophthal Epidemiol 1994; 1: 31–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Clearkin L, Harcourt B. Referral pattern of true and suspected glaucoma to an adult ophthalmic out-patient clinic. Trans Ophthalmol Soc UK 1983; 103: 284–7
   Google Scholar
• Brittain G PH, Austin D J, Kelly S P. A prospective study to determine sources and diagnostic accuracy of glaucoma referrals. Health Trends 1988; 20: 43–4
   Google Scholar
• Harrison R J., Wild J M, Hobley A J. Referral patterns to an ophthalmic outpatient clinic by general practitioners and ophthalmic opticians and the role of these professionals in screening for ocular disease. Br Med J 1988; 297: 1162–7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuck M W, Crick R P. Efficiency of referral for suspected glaucoma. Br Med J 1991; 302: 998–1000
   Google Scholar
• Annual Abstract of Statistics. HMSO, London 1994
   Google Scholar
• Ritchie J, Jacoby A, Bone M. Access to primary health care: an enquiry carried out on behalf of the United Kingdom health departments. HMSO, London 1981
   Google Scholar
• General Household Survey. Office of Population Censuses and Surveys. HMSO, London 1993
   Google Scholar
• Tuck M, Crick R. Testing and referral for chronic glaucoma. Health Trends 1989; 21: 131–4
   Google Scholar
• Sponsel W E, Ritch R, Stamper R, et al. Prevent Blindness America Visual Field Screening Study. Am J Ophthalmol 1995; 120: 699–708
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuck M W, Crick R. The proportion of confirmed glaucomas who have a family history of the disease [letter]. Ophthal Physiol Opt 1996; 16: 86–7
   Google Scholar
• Leske M C, Ederer F, Podgor M. Estimating incidence from age-specific prevalence in glaucoma. Am J Epidemiol 1981; 113: 606–13
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bengtsson B. Incidence of manifest glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 1989; 73: 483–7
   Google Scholar
• Ainsworth J R, Jay J L. Cost analysis of early trabeculectomy versus conventional management in primary open angle glaucoma. Eye 1991; 5: 322–8
   Google Scholar
• Glick H, Sminsky A, McDonald R C, Javitt J C. The cost of glaucoma in the United States in 1988. Chibret Int J Ophthalmol 1991; 10: 6–12
   Google Scholar