Primary trabeculectomy versus primary glaucoma eye drops for newly diagnosed advanced glaucoma: TAGS RCT.
ADVANCED OPEN-ANGLE GLAUCOMA
AUGMENTED TRABECULECTOMY
MITOMYCIN C
PRIMARY MEDICAL MANAGEMENT
QUALITY OF LIFE
RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Journal
Health technology assessment (Winchester, England)
ISSN: 2046-4924
Titre abrégé: Health Technol Assess
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9706284
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2021
11 2021
Historique:
entrez:
2
12
2021
pubmed:
3
12
2021
medline:
26
2
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Patients diagnosed with advanced primary open-angle glaucoma are at a high risk of lifetime blindness. Uncertainty exists about whether primary medical management (glaucoma eye drops) or primary surgical treatment (augmented trabeculectomy) provide the best and safest patient outcomes. To compare primary medical management with primary surgical treatment (augmented trabeculectomy) in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma presenting with advanced disease in terms of health-related quality of life, clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness. This was a two-arm, parallel, multicentre, pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Secondary care eye services. Adult patients presenting with advanced primary open-angle glaucoma in at least one eye, as defined by the Hodapp-Parrish-Anderson classification of severe glaucoma. Primary medical treatment - escalating medical management with glaucoma eye drops. Primary trabeculectomy treatment - trabeculectomy augmented with mitomycin C. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life measured with the Visual Function Questionnaire-25 at 2 years post randomisation. Secondary outcomes were mean intraocular pressure; EQ-5D-5L; Health Utilities Index 3; Glaucoma Utility Index; cost and cost-effectiveness; generic, vision-specific and disease-specific health-related quality of life; clinical effectiveness; and safety. A total of 453 participants were recruited. The mean age of the participants was 67 years (standard deviation 12 years) in the trabeculectomy arm and 68 years (standard deviation 12 years) in the medical management arm. Over 65% of participants were male and more than 80% were white. At 24 months, the mean difference in Visual Function Questionnaire-25 score was 1.06 (95% confidence interval -1.32 to 3.43; Our results suggested that there was no difference between treatment arms in health-related quality of life, as measured with the Visual Function Questionnaire-25 at 24 months. Intraocular pressure was better controlled in the trabeculectomy arm, and this may reduce visual field progression. Modelling over the patient's lifetime suggests that trabeculectomy may be cost-effective over the range of values of society's willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life-year. Further follow-up of participants will allow us to estimate the long-term differences of disease progression, patient experience and cost-effectiveness. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN56878850. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Glaucoma is an eye condition in which the intraocular pressure is too high, causing damage to the optic nerve and loss of vision. Patients with severe vision loss at diagnosis are the most at risk of blindness in their lifetime. Lowering pressure in the eye is the only way to prevent further vision loss. Two treatments to lower pressure are commonly used: using eye drops or having an operation known as a trabeculectomy. In England, Wales and Northern Ireland, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommends surgery as the first treatment. However, we do not know which treatment is best for preventing vision loss or which is safest, has the best patient experience or provides the best value for money for the NHS. Therefore, surgery is not usually carried out in the first instance and patients start with eye drops instead. This study compared whether starting treatment with eye drops affected the quality of life of patients with advanced glaucoma more or less than starting treatment with trabeculectomy. We also investigated if initial treatment with surgery and initial treatment with eye drops were equally good at controlling pressure and were equally safe, and how much each treatment cost the NHS. Every patient had an equal chance of starting treatment with surgery or eye drops and they participated in the study for 2 years. We found that quality of life was similar regardless of treatment. Those starting with surgery had lower pressure and needed far fewer types of eye drops than those starting with eye drops. Thirty-nine patients in the eye drop arm required surgery to control their glaucoma. Initial treatment with eye drops was cheaper over 2 years’ follow-up. Our study suggests that, over a 2-year period, having surgery in the first instance lowers intraocular pressure more than eye drops and is equally as safe as eye drops. Although eye drops are a cheaper treatment option for the NHS, if the effects of surgery on intraocular pressure are lasting, then the increased cost may be justified.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Patients diagnosed with advanced primary open-angle glaucoma are at a high risk of lifetime blindness. Uncertainty exists about whether primary medical management (glaucoma eye drops) or primary surgical treatment (augmented trabeculectomy) provide the best and safest patient outcomes.
OBJECTIVES
To compare primary medical management with primary surgical treatment (augmented trabeculectomy) in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma presenting with advanced disease in terms of health-related quality of life, clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness.
DESIGN
This was a two-arm, parallel, multicentre, pragmatic randomised controlled trial.
SETTING
Secondary care eye services.
PARTICIPANTS
Adult patients presenting with advanced primary open-angle glaucoma in at least one eye, as defined by the Hodapp-Parrish-Anderson classification of severe glaucoma.
INTERVENTION
Primary medical treatment - escalating medical management with glaucoma eye drops. Primary trabeculectomy treatment - trabeculectomy augmented with mitomycin C.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
The primary outcome was health-related quality of life measured with the Visual Function Questionnaire-25 at 2 years post randomisation. Secondary outcomes were mean intraocular pressure; EQ-5D-5L; Health Utilities Index 3; Glaucoma Utility Index; cost and cost-effectiveness; generic, vision-specific and disease-specific health-related quality of life; clinical effectiveness; and safety.
RESULTS
A total of 453 participants were recruited. The mean age of the participants was 67 years (standard deviation 12 years) in the trabeculectomy arm and 68 years (standard deviation 12 years) in the medical management arm. Over 65% of participants were male and more than 80% were white. At 24 months, the mean difference in Visual Function Questionnaire-25 score was 1.06 (95% confidence interval -1.32 to 3.43;
CONCLUSIONS
Our results suggested that there was no difference between treatment arms in health-related quality of life, as measured with the Visual Function Questionnaire-25 at 24 months. Intraocular pressure was better controlled in the trabeculectomy arm, and this may reduce visual field progression. Modelling over the patient's lifetime suggests that trabeculectomy may be cost-effective over the range of values of society's willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life-year.
FUTURE WORK
Further follow-up of participants will allow us to estimate the long-term differences of disease progression, patient experience and cost-effectiveness.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN56878850.
FUNDING
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in
Glaucoma is an eye condition in which the intraocular pressure is too high, causing damage to the optic nerve and loss of vision. Patients with severe vision loss at diagnosis are the most at risk of blindness in their lifetime. Lowering pressure in the eye is the only way to prevent further vision loss. Two treatments to lower pressure are commonly used: using eye drops or having an operation known as a trabeculectomy. In England, Wales and Northern Ireland, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommends surgery as the first treatment. However, we do not know which treatment is best for preventing vision loss or which is safest, has the best patient experience or provides the best value for money for the NHS. Therefore, surgery is not usually carried out in the first instance and patients start with eye drops instead. This study compared whether starting treatment with eye drops affected the quality of life of patients with advanced glaucoma more or less than starting treatment with trabeculectomy. We also investigated if initial treatment with surgery and initial treatment with eye drops were equally good at controlling pressure and were equally safe, and how much each treatment cost the NHS. Every patient had an equal chance of starting treatment with surgery or eye drops and they participated in the study for 2 years. We found that quality of life was similar regardless of treatment. Those starting with surgery had lower pressure and needed far fewer types of eye drops than those starting with eye drops. Thirty-nine patients in the eye drop arm required surgery to control their glaucoma. Initial treatment with eye drops was cheaper over 2 years’ follow-up. Our study suggests that, over a 2-year period, having surgery in the first instance lowers intraocular pressure more than eye drops and is equally as safe as eye drops. Although eye drops are a cheaper treatment option for the NHS, if the effects of surgery on intraocular pressure are lasting, then the increased cost may be justified.
Autres résumés
Type: plain-language-summary
(eng)
Glaucoma is an eye condition in which the intraocular pressure is too high, causing damage to the optic nerve and loss of vision. Patients with severe vision loss at diagnosis are the most at risk of blindness in their lifetime. Lowering pressure in the eye is the only way to prevent further vision loss. Two treatments to lower pressure are commonly used: using eye drops or having an operation known as a trabeculectomy. In England, Wales and Northern Ireland, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommends surgery as the first treatment. However, we do not know which treatment is best for preventing vision loss or which is safest, has the best patient experience or provides the best value for money for the NHS. Therefore, surgery is not usually carried out in the first instance and patients start with eye drops instead. This study compared whether starting treatment with eye drops affected the quality of life of patients with advanced glaucoma more or less than starting treatment with trabeculectomy. We also investigated if initial treatment with surgery and initial treatment with eye drops were equally good at controlling pressure and were equally safe, and how much each treatment cost the NHS. Every patient had an equal chance of starting treatment with surgery or eye drops and they participated in the study for 2 years. We found that quality of life was similar regardless of treatment. Those starting with surgery had lower pressure and needed far fewer types of eye drops than those starting with eye drops. Thirty-nine patients in the eye drop arm required surgery to control their glaucoma. Initial treatment with eye drops was cheaper over 2 years’ follow-up. Our study suggests that, over a 2-year period, having surgery in the first instance lowers intraocular pressure more than eye drops and is equally as safe as eye drops. Although eye drops are a cheaper treatment option for the NHS, if the effects of surgery on intraocular pressure are lasting, then the increased cost may be justified.
Substances chimiques
Ophthalmic Solutions
0
Banques de données
ISRCTN
['ISRCTN56878850']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Pragmatic Clinical Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1-158Subventions
Organisme : Department of Health
Pays : United Kingdom
Références
King AJ, Fernie G, Azuara-Blanco A, Burr JM, Garway-Heath T, Sparrow JM, et al. Treatment of Advanced Glaucoma Study: a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing primary medical treatment with primary trabeculectomy for people with newly diagnosed advanced glaucoma-study protocol. Br J Ophthalmol 2018;102:922–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-310902
doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-310902
Resnikoff S, Pascolini D, Etya’ale D, Kocur I, Pararajasegaram R, Pokharel GP, et al. Global data on visual impairment in the year 2002. Bull World Health Organ 2004;82:844–51.
Mitchell P, Smith W, Attebo K, Healey PR. Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma in Australia. The Blue Mountains Eye Study. Ophthalmology 1996;103:1661–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(96)30449-1
doi: 10.1016/S0161-6420(96)30449-1
Wolfs RC, Borger PH, Ramrattan RS, Klaver CC, Hulsman CA, Hofman A, et al. Changing views on open-angle glaucoma: definitions and prevalences – The Rotterdam Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2000;41:3309–21.
de Voogd S, Ikram MK, Wolfs RC, Jansonius NM, Hofman A, de Jong PT. Incidence of open-angle glaucoma in a general elderly population: the Rotterdam Study. Ophthalmology 2005;112:1487–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2005.04.018
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2005.04.018
Bonomi L, Marchini G, Marraffa M, Bernardi P, De Franco I, Perfetti S, et al. Prevalence of glaucoma and intraocular pressure distribution in a defined population. The Egna-Neumarkt Study. Ophthalmology 1998;105:209–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(98)92665-3
doi: 10.1016/S0161-6420(98)92665-3
Tielsch JM, Katz J, Singh K, Quigley HA, Gottsch JD, Javitt J, Sommer A. A population-based evaluation of glaucoma screening: the Baltimore Eye Survey. Am J Epidemiol 1991;134:1102–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116013
doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116013
Bunce C, Xing W, Wormald R. Causes of blind and partial sight certifications in England and Wales: April 2007–March 2008. Eye 2010;24:1692–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2010.122
doi: 10.1038/eye.2010.122
Bunce C, Wormald R. Causes of blind certifications in England and Wales: April 1999–March 2000. Eye 2008;22:905–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.eye.6702767
doi: 10.1038/sj.eye.6702767
King AJ, Reddy A, Thompson JR, Rosenthal AR. The rates of blindness and of partial sight registration in glaucoma patients. Eye 2000;14:613–19. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2000.152
doi: 10.1038/eye.2000.152
Spry PG, Spencer IC, Sparrow JM, Peters TJ, Brookes ST, Gray S, et al. The Bristol Shared Care Glaucoma Study: reliability of community optometric and hospital eye service test measures. Br J Ophthalmol 1999;83:707–12. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.83.6.707
doi: 10.1136/bjo.83.6.707
Harrison RJ, Wild JM, Hobley AJ. Referral patterns to an ophthalmic outpatient clinic by general practitioners and ophthalmic opticians and the role of these professionals in screening for ocular disease. BMJ 1988;297:1162–7. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.297.6657.1162
doi: 10.1136/bmj.297.6657.1162
Morley AMS, Murdoch I. The future of glaucoma clinics. Br J Ophthalmol 2006;90:640–5. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2005.085522
doi: 10.1136/bjo.2005.085522
Burr JM, Mowatt G, Hernández R, Siddiqui MA, Cook J, Lourenco T, et al. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening for open angle glaucoma: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2007;11(41). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta11410
doi: 10.3310/hta11410
Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC). Healthy Lives, Healthy People: Improving Outcomes and Supporting Transparency. London: DHSC; 2012.
Coffey M, Reidy A, Wormald R, Xian WX, Wright L, Courtney P. Prevalence of glaucoma in the west of Ireland. Br J Ophthalmol 1993;77:17–21. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.77.1.17
doi: 10.1136/bjo.77.1.17
Elkington AR, MacKean J, Sargent P. A collaborative hospital glaucoma survey. Res Clin Forum 1982;4:31–40.
Ng WS, Agarwal PK, Sidiki S, McKay L, Townend J, Azuara-Blanco A. The effect of socio-economic deprivation on severity of glaucoma at presentation. Br J Ophthalmol 2010;94:85–7. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2008.153312
doi: 10.1136/bjo.2008.153312
Sheldrick JH, Ng C, Austin DJ, Rosenthal AR. An analysis of referral routes and diagnostic accuracy in cases of suspected glaucoma. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 1994;1:31–9. https://doi.org/10.3109/09286589409071443
doi: 10.3109/09286589409071443
Sukumar S, Spencer F, Fenerty C, Harper R, Henson D. The influence of socioeconomic and clinical factors upon the presenting visual field status of patients with glaucoma. Eye 2009;23:1038–44. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2008.245
doi: 10.1038/eye.2008.245
Fraser S, Bunce C, Wormald R. Risk factors for late presentation in chronic glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1999;40:2251–7.
Fraser S, Bunce C, Wormald R, Brunner E. Deprivation and late presentation of glaucoma: case-control study. BMJ 2001;322:639–43. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.322.7287.639
doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7287.639
Odberg T. Visual field prognosis in advanced glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol 1987;65(Suppl):27–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-3768.1987.tb02583.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.1987.tb02583.x
Mikelberg FS, Schulzer M, Drance SM, Lau W. The rate of progression of scotomas in glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 1986;101:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9394(86)90457-5
doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(86)90457-5
Grant WM, Burke JF, J. Why do some people go blind from glaucoma? Ophthalmology 1982;89:991–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(82)34675-8
doi: 10.1016/S0161-6420(82)34675-8
Wilson R, Walker AM, Dueker DK, Crick RP. Risk factors for rate of progression of glaucomatous visual field loss: a computer-based analysis. Arch Ophthalmol 1982;100:737–41. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.1982.01030030741002
doi: 10.1001/archopht.1982.01030030741002
Hattenhauer MG, Johnson DH, Ing HH, Herman DC, Hodge DO, Yawn BP, et al. The probability of blindness from open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmology 1998;105:2099–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(98)91133-2
doi: 10.1016/S0161-6420(98)91133-2
Parc CE, Johnson DH, Oliver JE, Hattenhauer MG, Hodge DO. The long-term outcome of glaucoma filtration surgery. Am J Ophthalmol 2001;132:27–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9394(01)00923-0
doi: 10.1016/S0002-9394(01)00923-0
Oliver JE, Hattenhauer MG, Herman D, Hodge DO, Kennedy R, Fang-Yen M, Johnson DH. Blindness and glaucoma: a comparison of patients progressing to blindness from glaucoma with patients maintaining vision. Am J Ophthalmol 2002;133:764–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9394(02)01403-4
doi: 10.1016/S0002-9394(02)01403-4
Burr J, Azuara-Blanco A, Avenell A, Tuulonen A. Medical versus surgical interventions for open angle glaucoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;9:CD004399. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004399.pub3
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004399.pub3
Lichter PR, Musch DC, Gillespie BW, Guire KE, Janz NK, Wren PA, Mills RP, CIGTS Study Group. Interim clinical outcomes in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study comparing initial treatment randomized to medications or surgery. Ophthalmology 2001;108:1943–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(01)00873-9
doi: 10.1016/S0161-6420(01)00873-9
Collaborative Normal-Tension Glaucoma Study Group. Comparison of glaucomatous progression between untreated patients with normal-tension glaucoma and patients with therapeutically reduced intraocular pressures. Am J Ophthalmol 1998;126:487–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9394(98)00223-2
doi: 10.1016/S0002-9394(98)00223-2
Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ, Johnson CA, et al. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120:714–20. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.120.6.714
doi: 10.1001/archopht.120.6.714
The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study Investigators. The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS): 7. The relationship between control of intraocular pressure and visual field deterioration. Am J Ophthalmol 2000;130:429–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9394(00)00538-9
doi: 10.1016/S0002-9394(00)00538-9
Stead R, Azuara-Blanco A, King AJ. Attitudes of consultant ophthalmologists in the UK to initial management of glaucoma patients presenting with severe visual field loss: a national survey. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2011;39:858–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9071.2011.02574.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2011.02574.x
O’Brart DP, Shiew M, Edmunds B. A randomised, prospective study comparing trabeculectomy with viscocanalostomy with adjunctive antimetabolite usage for the management of open angle glaucoma uncontrolled by medical therapy. Br J Ophthalmol 2004;88:1012–17. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2003.037432
doi: 10.1136/bjo.2003.037432
Bhargava JS, Patel B, Foss AJ, Avery AJ, King AJ. Views of glaucoma patients on aspects of their treatment: an assessment of patient preference by conjoint analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47:2885–8. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.05-1244
doi: 10.1167/iovs.05-1244
National Collaborating Centre for Acute Care. Glaucoma: Diagnosis and Management of Chronic Open Angle Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2009.
Migdal C, Gregory W, Hitchings R. Long-term functional outcome after early surgery compared with laser and medicine in open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmology 1994;101:1651–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(94)31120-1
doi: 10.1016/S0161-6420(94)31120-1
Jay JL, Murray SB. Early trabeculectomy versus conventional management in primary open angle glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 1988;72:881–9. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.72.12.881
doi: 10.1136/bjo.72.12.881
Smith R. A comparison between medical and surgical treatment of glaucoma simplex – results of a prospective study. Trans Ophthalmol Soc Aust 1968;27:17–29.
Ederer F, Gaasterland DE, Sullivan EK, AGIS Investigators. The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS): 1. Study design and methods and baseline characteristics of study patients. Control Clin Trials 1994;15:299–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(94)90046-9
doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(94)90046-9
Musch DC, Gillespie BW, Lichter PR, Niziol LM, Janz NK, CIGTS Study Investigators. Visual field progression in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study the impact of treatment and other baseline factors. Ophthalmology 2009;116:200–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.08.051
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.08.051
Leighton P, Lonsdale AJ, Tildsley J, King AJ. The willingness of patients presenting with advanced glaucoma to participate in a trial comparing primary medical vs primary surgical treatment. Eye 2012;26:300–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2011.279
doi: 10.1038/eye.2011.279
Mangione CM, Lee PP, Gutierrez PR, Spritzer K, Berry S, Hays RD, National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire Field Test Investigators. Development of the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. Arch Ophthalmol 2001;119:1050–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.119.7.1050
doi: 10.1001/archopht.119.7.1050
McKean-Cowdin R, Wang Y, Wu J, Azen SP, Varma R, Los Angeles Latino Eye Study Group. Impact of visual field loss on health-related quality of life in glaucoma: the Los Angeles Latino Eye Study. Ophthalmology 2008;115:941–8.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.08.037
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.08.037
Hyman LG, Komaroff E, Heijl A, Bengtsson B, Leske MC, Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial Group. Treatment and vision-related quality of life in the early manifest glaucoma trial. Ophthalmology 2005;112:1505–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2005.03.028
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2005.03.028
Chun YS, Sung KR, Park CK, Kim HK, Yoo C, Kim YY, et al. Vision-related quality of life according to location of visual field loss in patients with glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol 2019;97:e772–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.14020
doi: 10.1111/aos.14020
Daga FB, Gracitelli CPB, Diniz-Filho A, Medeiros FA. Is vision-related quality of life impaired in patients with preperimetric glaucoma? Br J Ophthalmol 2018;103:955–9. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2018-312357
doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2018-312357
Rulli E, Quaranta L, Riva I, Poli D, Hollander L, Galli F, et al. Visual field loss and vision-related quality of life in the Italian Primary Open Angle Glaucoma Study. Sci Rep 2018;8:619. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-19113-z
doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-19113-z
Kotecha A, Feuer WJ, Barton K, Gedde SJ, Tube Versus Trabeculectomy Study Group. Quality of life in the Tube Versus Trabeculectomy Study. Am J Ophthalmol 2017;176:228–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2017.01.019
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2017.01.019
Abe RY, Diniz-Filho A, Costa VP, Gracitelli CP, Baig S, Medeiros FA. The impact of location of progressive visual field loss on longitudinal changes in quality of life of patients with glaucoma. Ophthalmology 2016;123:552–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.10.046
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.10.046
Sun Y, Lin C, Waisbourd M, Ekici F, Erdem E, Wizov SS, et al. The impact of visual field clusters on performance-based measures and vision-related quality of life in patients with glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 2016;163:45–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2015.12.006
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2015.12.006
Hirneiss C. The impact of a better-seeing eye and a worse-seeing eye on vision-related quality of life. Clin Ophthalmol 2014;8:1703–9. https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S64200
doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S64200
Burr JM, Kilonzo M, Vale L, Ryan M. Developing a preference-based Glaucoma Utility Index using a discrete choice experiment. Optom Vis Sci 2007;84:797–808. https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181339f30
doi: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181339f30
King AJ, Hudson J, Fernie G, Burr J, Azuara-Blanco A, Sparrow JM, et al. Baseline characteristics of participants in the Treatment of Advanced Glaucoma Study: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Am J Ophthalmol 2020;213:186–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2020.01.026
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2020.01.026
Thorpe KE, Zwarenstein M, Oxman AD, Treweek S, Furberg CD, Altman DG, et al. A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers. CMAJ 2009;180:E47–57. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.090523
doi: 10.1503/cmaj.090523
Garway-Heath DF, Crabb DP, Bunce C, Lascaratos G, Amalfitano F, Anand N, et al. Latanoprost for open-angle glaucoma (UKGTS): a randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2015;385:1295–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62111-5
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62111-5
Gazzard G, Konstantakopoulou E, Garway-Heath D, Garg A, Vickerstaff V, Hunter R, et al. Selective laser trabeculoplasty versus eye drops for first-line treatment of ocular hypertension and glaucoma (LiGHT): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2019;393:1505–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32213-X
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32213-X
Gedde SJ, Feuer WJ, Lim KS, Barton K, Goyal S, Ahmed IIK, et al. Treatment outcomes in the Primary Tube Versus Trabeculectomy Study after 3 years of follow-up. Ophthalmology 2020;127:333–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2019.10.002
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2019.10.002
Kirwan JF, Lockwood AJ, Shah P, Macleod A, Broadway DC, King AJ, et al. Trabeculectomy in the 21st century: a multicenter analysis. Ophthalmology 2013;120:2532–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.07.049
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.07.049
Maier PC, Funk J, Schwarzer G, Antes G, Falck-Ytter YT. Treatment of ocular hypertension and open angle glaucoma: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2005;331:134. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38506.594977.E0
doi: 10.1136/bmj.38506.594977.E0
Parrish RK, Palmberg P, Sheu WP, XLT Study Group. A comparison of latanoprost, bimatoprost, and travoprost in patients with elevated intraocular pressure: a 12-week, randomized, masked-evaluator multicenter study. Am J Ophthalmol 2003;135:688–703. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9394(03)00098-9
doi: 10.1016/S0002-9394(03)00098-9
Hodapp E, Parrish RK, Anderson DR. Clinical Decisions in Glaucoma. St Louis, MO: Mosby Inc.; 1993.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Glaucoma: Diagnosis and Management. NICE Guideline [NG81]. London: NICE; 2017.
McCulloch P, Altman DG, Campbell WB, Flum DR, Glasziou P, Marshall JC, et al. No surgical innovation without evaluation: the IDEAL recommendations. Lancet 2009;374:1105–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61116-8
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61116-8
Ergina PL, Cook JA, Blazeby JM, Boutron I, Clavien PA, Reeves BC, et al. Challenges in evaluating surgical innovation. Lancet 2009;374:1097–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61086-2
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61086-2
Cate H, Bhattacharya D, Clark A, Holland R, Broadway DC. A comparison of measures used to describe adherence to glaucoma medication in a randomised controlled trial. Clin Trials 2015;12:608–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774515592636
doi: 10.1177/1740774515592636
Richman J, Lorenzana LL, Lankaranian D, Dugar J, Mayer JR, Wizov SS, Spaeth GL. Relationships in glaucoma patients between standard vision tests, quality of life, and ability to perform daily activities. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2010;17:144–51. https://doi.org/10.3109/09286581003734878
doi: 10.3109/09286581003734878
Guedes RA, Guedes VM, Freitas SM, Chaoubah A. Quality of life of medically versus surgically treated glaucoma patients. J Glaucoma 2013;22:369–73. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0b013e31824ceb8b
doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e31824ceb8b
Wu P, Xi S, Xia H, Lu H, Guo W. Survey on vision-related quality of life and self-management among patients with glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2014;23:75–80. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0b013e318265bbf3
doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e318265bbf3
Gutierrez P, Wilson MR, Johnson C, Gordon M, Cioffi GA, Ritch R, et al. Influence of glaucomatous visual field loss on health-related quality of life. Arch Ophthalmol 1997;115:777–84. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.1997.01100150779014
doi: 10.1001/archopht.1997.01100150779014
Jampel HD, Friedman DS, Quigley H, Miller R. Correlation of the binocular visual field with patient assessment of vision. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43:1059–67.
Nelson P, Aspinall P, Papasouliotis O, Worton B, O’Brien C. Quality of life in glaucoma and its relationship with visual function. J Glaucoma 2003;12:139–50. https://doi.org/10.1097/00061198-200304000-00009
doi: 10.1097/00061198-200304000-00009
Azuara-Blanco A, Burr J, Ramsay C, Cooper D, Foster PJ, Friedman DS, et al. Effectiveness of early lens extraction for the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma (EAGLE): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2016;388:1389–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30956-4
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30956-4
Prior M, Ramsay CR, Burr JM, Campbell SE, Jenkinson DJ, Asoaka R, Francis JJ. Theoretical and empirical dimensions of the Aberdeen Glaucoma Questionnaire: a cross sectional survey and principal component analysis. BMC Ophthalmol 2013;13:72. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2415-13-72
doi: 10.1186/1471-2415-13-72
Chehamzeh J. Assessment of Glaucoma: Using Patient Reported Measures in Randomised Controlled Trials. Aberdeen: University of Aberdeen; 2011.
Suñer IJ, Kokame GT, Yu E, Ward J, Dolan C, Bressler NM. Responsiveness of NEI VFQ-25 to changes in visual acuity in neovascular AMD: validation studies from two phase 3 clinical trials. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2009;50:3629–35. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.08-3225
doi: 10.1167/iovs.08-3225
Candlish J, Teare MD, Dimairo M, Flight L, Mandefield L, Walters SJ. Appropriate statistical methods for analysing partially nested randomised controlled trials with continuous outcomes: a simulation study. BMC Med Res Methodol 2018;18:105. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0559-x
doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0559-x
Emsley R, Dunn G, White IR. Mediation and moderation of treatment effects in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions. Stat Methods Med Res 2010;19:237–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0962280209105014
doi: 10.1177/0962280209105014
Ryan M, Gerard K, Amaya-Amaya M. Using Discrete Choice Experiments to Value Health and Health Care. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer; 2007. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5753-3
doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-5753-3
Ryan M, Netten A, Skåtun D, Smith P. Using discrete choice experiments to estimate a preference-based measure of outcome – an application to social care for older people. J Health Econ 2006;25:927–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2006.01.001
doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2006.01.001
McKenzie L, Cairns J, Osman L. Symptom-based outcome measures for asthma: the use of discrete choice methods to assess patient preferences. Health Policy 2001;57:193–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-8510(01)00128-2
doi: 10.1016/S0168-8510(01)00128-2
McFadden D. Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behaviour. Berkeley, CA: University of California at Berkeley; 1973.
Greiner R, Bliemer M, Ballweg J. Design considerations of a choice experiment to estimate likely participation by north Australian pastoralists in contractual biodiversity conservation. J Choice Model 2014;10:34–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocm.2014.01.002
doi: 10.1016/j.jocm.2014.01.002
Bliemer MCJ, Rose JM. Experimental design influences on stated choice outputs: an empirical study in air travel choice. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 2011;45:63–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2010.09.003
doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2010.09.003
Reed Johnson F, Lancsar E, Marshall D, Kilambi V, Mühlbacher A, Regier DA, et al. Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Experimental Design Good Research Practices Task Force. Value Health 2013;16:3–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.2223
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.2223
Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res 2011;20:1727–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x
doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x
Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O’Brien BJ, Stoddart GL. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005.
Caprioli J, Coleman AL. Intraocular pressure fluctuation a risk factor for visual field progression at low intraocular pressures in the advanced glaucoma intervention study. Ophthalmology 2008;115:1123–9.e3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.10.031
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.10.031
Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC). NHS Reference Costs 2017–2018. London: DHSC; 2018.
Curtis L, Burns A. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2018. Canterbury: PSSRU, University of Kent; 2018.
Joint Formulary Committee. British National Formulary (online). London: BMJ Group and Pharmaceutical Press. URL: www.medicinescomplete.com (accessed 22 May 2020).
Department for Transport. TAG Data Book. Department for Transport; 2019. URL: www.gov.uk/government/publications/tag-data-book (accessed 16 December 2020).
Office for National Statistics. Employee Earnings in the UK: 2018. Newport, Wales: Office for National Statistics; 2018.
NHS Improvement. National Cost Collection for the NHS. URL: https://improvement.nhs.uk/resources/national-cost-collection/ (accessed 1 May 2018).
Curtis L, Burns A. Community Based Health Care Staff. In Curtis L, Burns A, editors. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2018. Canterbury: PSSRU, University of Kent; 2018. pp. 117–33.
UK Government. Simplified Expenses if You’re Self-employed. Business and Self-employed 2018. URL: www.gov.uk/simpler-income-tax-simplified-expenses (accessed 1 May 2018).
Janssen MF, Pickard AS, Golicki D, Gudex C, Niewada M, Scalone L, et al. Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: a multi-country study. Qual Life Res 2013;22:1717–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-012-0322-4
doi: 10.1007/s11136-012-0322-4
Horsman J, Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance G. The Health Utilities Index (HUI): concepts, measurement properties and applications. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003;1:54. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-1-54
doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-1-54
van Hout B, Janssen MF, Feng YS, Kohlmann T, Busschbach J, Golicki D, et al. Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health 2012;15:708–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.008
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.008
Devlin NJ, Shah KK, Feng Y, Mulhern B, van Hout B. Valuing health-related quality of life: an EQ-5D-5L value set for England. Health Econ 2018;27:7–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.3564
doi: 10.1002/hec.3564
Gray AM, Clarke PM, Wolstenholme JL, Wordsworth S. Applied Methods of Cost-effectiveness Analysis in Healthcare. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010.
Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Drummond M, McCabe C. Whither trial-based economic evaluation for health care decision making? Health Econ 2006;15:677–87. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1093
doi: 10.1002/hec.1093
Jonas JB, Aung T, Bourne RR, Bron AM, Ritch R, Panda-Jonas S. Glaucoma. Lancet 2017;390:2183–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31469-1
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31469-1
Pan Y, Varma R. Natural history of glaucoma. Indian J Ophthalmol 2011;59:S19–23. https://doi.org/10.4103/0301-4738.73682
doi: 10.4103/0301-4738.73682
Briggs A, Sculpher M, Claxton K. Decision Modelling for Health Economic Evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006.
Drummond M, Sculpher M, Claxton K, Stoddart G, Torrance G. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. 4th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015.
Brusini P, Filacorda S. Enhanced Glaucoma Staging System (GSS 2) for classifying functional damage in glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2006;15:40–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ijg.0000195932.48288.97
doi: 10.1097/01.ijg.0000195932.48288.97
Hernández RA, Burr JM, Vale LD, OAG Screening Project Group. Economic evaluation of screening for open-angle glaucoma. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2008;24:203–11. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462308080288
doi: 10.1017/S0266462308080288
Javanbakht M, Azuara-Blanco A, Burr JM, Ramsay C, Cooper D, Cochran C, et al. Early lens extraction with intraocular lens implantation for the treatment of primary angle closure glaucoma: an economic evaluation based on data from the EAGLE trial. BMJ Open 2017;7:e013254. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013254
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013254
Stein JD, Kim DD, Peck WW, Giannetti SM, Hutton DW. Cost-effectiveness of medications compared with laser trabeculoplasty in patients with newly diagnosed open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2012;130:497–505. https://doi.org/10.1001/archophthalmol.2011.2727
doi: 10.1001/archophthalmol.2011.2727
Choi JA, Song LD, Choi S, Park SM, Kwon JW, Jee D. The cost-effectiveness of medication, laser trabeculoplasty, and trabeculectomy for treatment of open-angle glaucoma in South Korea. Medicine 2019;98:e14026. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000014026
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000014026
Hunink MM, Weinstein MC, Wittenberg E, Drummond MF, Pliskin JS, Wong JB, et al. Decision Making in Health and Medicine: Integrating Evidence and Values. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2014. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139506779
doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139506779
Gray AM, Clarke PM, Wolstenholme JL, Wordsworth S. Applied Methods of Cost-effectiveness Analysis in Healthcare. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.
Kobelt G. Health economics, economic evaluation, and glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2002;11:531–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/00061198-200212000-00015
doi: 10.1097/00061198-200212000-00015
Brown GC. Vision and quality-of-life. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 1999;97:473–511.
Crabb DP, Russell RA, Malik R, Anand N, Baker H, Boodhna T, et al. Frequency of visual field testing when monitoring patients newly diagnosed with glaucoma: mixed methods and modelling. Health Serv Deliv Res 2014;2(27). https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr02270
doi: 10.3310/hsdr02270
Office for National Statistics. Interim Life Tables. National Life Tables, UK: 2016 to 2018. 2019. URL: www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/lifeexpectancies/bulletins/nationallifetablesunitedkingdom/previousReleases (accessed 2019).
Krumpaszky HG, Dietz K, Mickler A, Selbmann HK. Mortality in blind subjects. Ophthalmologica 1999;213:48–53. https://doi.org/10.1159/000027393
doi: 10.1159/000027393
Edlin R, McCabe C, Hulme C, Hall P, Wright J. Cost Effectiveness Modelling for Health Technology Assessment. London, UK: Springer; 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15744-3
doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-15744-3
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal 2013. London: NICE; 2013.
EuroQol Group. EuroQol – a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990;16:199–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9
doi: 10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9
Tosh J, Brazier J, Evans P, Longworth L. A review of generic preference-based measures of health-related quality of life in visual disorders. Value Health 2012;15:118–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.08.002
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.08.002
York Health Economics Consortium. Probabilistic/Stochastic Sensitivity Analysis; 2016. URL: https://yhec.co.uk/glossary/probabilistic-stochastic-sensitivity-analysis/ (accessed 2020).
Kulkarni BB, Leighton P, King AJ. Exploring patients’ expectations and preferences of glaucoma surgery outcomes to facilitate healthcare delivery and inform future glaucoma research. Br J Ophthalmol 2019;103:1850–5. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2018-313401
doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2018-313401
Bhargava JS, Bhan-Bhargava A, Foss AJ, King AJ. Views of glaucoma patients on provision of follow-up care; an assessment of patient preferences by conjoint analysis. Br J Ophthalmol 2008;92:1601–5. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2008.140483
doi: 10.1136/bjo.2008.140483
Bergholz R, Dutescu RM, Steinhagen-Thiessen E, Rosada A. Ophthalmologic health status of an aging population-data from the Berlin Aging Study II (BASE-II). Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2019;257:1981–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-019-04386-z
doi: 10.1007/s00417-019-04386-z
McKean-Cowdin R, Varma R, Wu J, Hays RD, Azen SP, Los Angeles Latino Eye Study Group. Severity of visual field loss and health-related quality of life. Am J Ophthalmol 2007;143:1013–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2007.02.022
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2007.02.022
Medeiros FA, Gracitelli CP, Boer ER, Weinreb RN, Zangwill LM, Rosen PN. Longitudinal changes in quality of life and rates of progressive visual field loss in glaucoma patients. Ophthalmology 2015;122:293–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.08.014
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.08.014
Janz NK, Wren PA, Lichter PR, Musch DC, Gillespie BW, Guire KE, Mills RP, CIGTS Study Group. The Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study: interim quality of life findings after initial medical or surgical treatment of glaucoma. Ophthalmology 2001;108:1954–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(01)00874-0
doi: 10.1016/S0161-6420(01)00874-0
Thygesen J, Aagren M, Arnavielle S, Bron A, Fröhlich SJ, Baggesen K, et al. Late-stage, primary open-angle glaucoma in Europe: social and health care maintenance costs and quality of life of patients from 4 countries. Curr Med Res Opin 2008;24:1763–70. https://doi.org/10.1185/03007990802111068
doi: 10.1185/03007990802111068
Montemayor F, Sibley LM, Courtright P, Mikelberg FS. Contribution of multiple glaucoma medications to visual function and quality of life in patients with glaucoma. Can J Ophthalmol 2001;36:385–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-4182(01)80082-X
doi: 10.1016/S0008-4182(01)80082-X
Kobelt G, Jonsson B, Bergström A, Chen E, Lindén C, Alm A. Cost-effectiveness analysis in glaucoma: what drives utility? Results from a pilot study in Sweden. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2006;84:363–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0420.2005.00621.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0420.2005.00621.x
Gazzard G, Konstantakopoulou E, Garway-Heath D, Garg A, Vickerstaff V, Hunter R, et al. Selective laser trabeculoplasty versus drops for newly diagnosed ocular hypertension and glaucoma: the LiGHT RCT. Health Technol Assess 2019;23(31). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta23310
doi: 10.3310/hta23310
Jones L, Garway-Heath DF, Azuara-Blanco A, Crabb DP, United Kingdom Glaucoma Treatment Study Investigators. Are patient self-reported outcome measures sensitive enough to be used as end points in clinical trials?: evidence from the United Kingdom Glaucoma Treatment Study. Ophthalmology 2019;126:682–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.09.034
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.09.034
Damji KF, Behki R, Wang L, Target IOP Workshop participants. Canadian perspectives in glaucoma management: setting target intraocular pressure range. Can J Ophthalmol 2003;38:189–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-4182(03)80060-1
doi: 10.1016/S0008-4182(03)80060-1
Stead RE, King AJ. Outcome of trabeculectomy with mitomycin C in patients with advanced glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 2011;95:960–5. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2010.185272
doi: 10.1136/bjo.2010.185272
Chen R, King AJ. Lifetime visual outcomes of patients undergoing trabeculectomy. Br J Ophthalmol 2021;105:1566–70.
Jones E, Clarke J, Khaw PT. Recent advances in trabeculectomy technique. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2005;16:107–13. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.icu.0000156138.05323.6f
doi: 10.1097/01.icu.0000156138.05323.6f
King AJ, Rotchford AP, Alwitry A, Moodie J. Frequency of bleb manipulations after trabeculectomy surgery. Br J Ophthalmol 2007;91:873–7. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2006.109835
doi: 10.1136/bjo.2006.109835
Khaw PT, Chiang M, Shah P, Sii F, Lockwood A, Khalili A. Enhanced trabeculectomy: the Moorfields Safer Surgery System. Dev Ophthalmol 2017;59:15–35. https://doi.org/10.1159/000458483
doi: 10.1159/000458483
Stalmans I, Gillis A, Lafaut AS, Zeyen T. Safe trabeculectomy technique: long term outcome. Br J Ophthalmol 2006;90:44–7. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2005.072884
doi: 10.1136/bjo.2005.072884
Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Bengtsson B, Hussein M, Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial Group. Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: results from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120:1268–79. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.120.10.1268
doi: 10.1001/archopht.120.10.1268
Olali C, Rotchford AP, King AJ. Outcome of repeat trabeculectomies. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2011;39:658–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9071.2011.02519.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2011.02519.x
Jampel H. Trabeculectomy: more effective at causing cataract surgery than lowering intraocular pressure? Ophthalmology 2009;116:173–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.11.016
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.11.016
Musch DC, Gillespie BW, Niziol LM, Janz NK, Wren PA, Rockwood EJ, Lichter PR, Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study Group. Cataract extraction in the collaborative initial glaucoma treatment study: incidence, risk factors, and the effect of cataract progression and extraction on clinical and quality-of-life outcomes. Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124:1694–700. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.124.12.1694
doi: 10.1001/archopht.124.12.1694
Husain R, Liang S, Foster PJ, Gazzard G, Bunce C, Chew PT, et al. Cataract surgery after trabeculectomy: the effect on trabeculectomy function. Arch Ophthalmol 2012;130:165–70. https://doi.org/10.1001/archophthalmol.2011.329
doi: 10.1001/archophthalmol.2011.329
Longo A, Uva MG, Reibaldi A, Avitabile T, Reibaldi M. Long-term effect of phacoemulsification on trabeculectomy function. Eye 2015;29:1347–52. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2015.108
doi: 10.1038/eye.2015.108
Rebolleda G, Muñoz-Negrete FJ. Effect of cataract surgery on IOP after trabeculectomy. J Cataract Refract Surg 2003;29:2043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2003.09.029
doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2003.09.029
Edmunds B, Thompson JR, Salmon JF, Wormald RP. The National Survey of Trabeculectomy. III. Early and late complications. Eye 2002;16:297–303. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.eye.6700148
doi: 10.1038/sj.eye.6700148
Moster MR, Moster ML. Wipe-out: a complication of glaucoma surgery or just a blast from the past? Am J Ophthalmol 2005;140:705–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2005.05.024
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2005.05.024
Topouzis F, Tranos P, Koskosas A, Pappas T, Anastasopoulos E, Dimitrakos S, Wilson MR. Risk of sudden visual loss following filtration surgery in end-stage glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 2005;140:661–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2005.04.016
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2005.04.016
Balekudaru S, George R, Panday M, Singh M, Neog A, Lingam V. Prospective evaluation of early visual loss following glaucoma-filtering surgery in eyes with split fixation. J Glaucoma 2014;23:211–18. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0000000000000041
doi: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000041
Law SK, Nguyen AM, Coleman AL, Caprioli J. Severe loss of central vision in patients with advanced glaucoma undergoing trabeculectomy. Arch Ophthalmol 2007;125:1044–50. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.125.8.1044
doi: 10.1001/archopht.125.8.1044
Costa VP, Smith M, Spaeth GL, Gandham S, Markovitz B. Loss of visual acuity after trabeculectomy. Ophthalmology 1993;100:599–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(93)31597-6
doi: 10.1016/S0161-6420(93)31597-6
Luebke J, Neuburger M, Jordan JF, Wecker T, Boehringer D, Cakir B, et al. Bleb-related infections and long-term follow-up after trabeculectomy. Int Ophthalmol 2019;39:571–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-018-0851-0
doi: 10.1007/s10792-018-0851-0
Kim EA, Law SK, Coleman AL, Nouri-Mahdavi K, Giaconi JA, Yu F, et al. Long-term bleb-related infections after trabeculectomy: incidence, risk factors, and influence of bleb revision. Am J Ophthalmol 2015;159:1082–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2015.03.001
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2015.03.001
Wong MH, Husain R, Ang BC, Gazzard G, Foster PJ, Htoon HM, et al. The Singapore 5-fluorouracil trial: intraocular pressure outcomes at 8 years. Ophthalmology 2013;120:1127–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.12.004
doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.12.004
Zahid S, Musch DC, Niziol LM, Lichter PR, Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study Group. Risk of endophthalmitis and other long-term complications of trabeculectomy in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study (CIGTS). Am J Ophthalmol 2013;155:674–80, 680.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2012.10.017
doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2012.10.017
Alwitry A, King AJ. Surveillance of late-onset bleb leak, blebitis and bleb-related endophthalmitis – a UK incidence study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2012;250:1231–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-011-1920-5
doi: 10.1007/s00417-011-1920-5
Cook JA. The challenges faced in the design, conduct and analysis of surgical randomised controlled trials. Trials 2009;10:9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-10-9
doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-10-9
Guedes RA, Guedes VM, Chaoubah A. Cost-effectiveness comparison between non-penetrating deep sclerectomy and maximum-tolerated medical therapy for glaucoma within the Brazilian National Health System (SUS). Arq Bras Oftalmol 2012;75:11–15. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0004-27492012000100002
doi: 10.1590/S0004-27492012000100002
Ting NS, Li Yim JF, Ng JY. Different strategies and cost-effectiveness in the treatment of primary open angle glaucoma. ClinicoEcon Outcomes Res 2014;6:523–30. https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S30697
doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S30697
Bartelt-Hofer J, Ben-Debba L, Flessa S. Systematic review of economic evaluations in primary open-angle glaucoma: decision analytic modeling insights. PharmacoEcon Open 2020;4:5–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41669-019-0141-4
doi: 10.1007/s41669-019-0141-4
Guedes RAP, Guedes VMP, Gomes CEM, Chaoubah A. Maximizing cost-effectiveness by adjusting treatment strategy according to glaucoma severity. Medicine 2016;95:e5745. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000005745
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000005745
Tsai JC. Medication adherence in glaucoma: approaches for optimizing patient compliance. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2006;17:190–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.icu.0000193078.47616.aa
doi: 10.1097/01.icu.0000193078.47616.aa
Joint Formulary Committee. British National Formulary (online). London: BMJ Group and Pharmaceutical Press. URL: www.medicinescomplete.com (accessed 22 May 2020).
Curtis L, Burns A. Community Based Health Care Staff. In Curtis L, Burns A, editors. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2018. Canterbury: PSSRU, University of Kent; 2018. pp. 153–67.
Curtis L, Burns A. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2015. Canterbury: PSSRU, University of Kent; 2015.
Curtis L, Burns A. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2017. Canterbury: PSSRU, University of Kent; 2017.
Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC). General Ophthalmic Service Fees and Vouncher Values from April 2018. London: DHSC; 2018.
Azuara-Blanco A, Banister K, Boachie C, McMeekin P, Gray J, Burr J, et al. Automated imaging technologies for the diagnosis of glaucoma: a comparative diagnostic study for the evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy, performance as triage tests and cost-effectiveness (GATE study). Health Technol Assess 2016;20(8). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta20080
doi: 10.3310/hta20080