 |
 |

Evidence for Changing Guidelines for Routine Screening for Retinopathy of Prematurity
Shoo K. Lee, MBBS, FRCPC, PhD;
Charles Normand, BA, DPhil;
Douglas McMillan, MD, FRCPC;
Arne Ohlsson, MD, FRCPC, MSc;
Michael Vincer, MD, FRCPC;
Christopher Lyons, MBBS, FRCSC;
for the Canadian Neonatal Network
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2001;155:387-395.
Context Existing guidelines recommended by the Canadian Pediatric Society (CPS)
and American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) for routine screening for retinopathy
of prematurity (ROP) remain controversial.
Objective To determine whether current guidelines for routine screening for ROP
should be changed.
Design We examined data that were collected as part of a larger study of 14
neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in Canada. We examined the effect of
strategies using different birth weight (BW) and gestational age (GA) criteria
for routine ROP screening, and performed a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Setting The 14 NICUs (except one) are regional tertiary level referral centres
serving geographic regions of Canada, and include approximately 60% of all
tertiary-level NICU beds in Canada.
Patients This large cohort included all 16 424 infants admitted to 14 Canadian
NICUs from January 8, 1996, to October 31, 1997.
Interventions None.
Main Outcome Measure Treatment for ROP.
Results The most cost-effective strategy was to routinely screen only infants
having a BW of 1200 g or less. This included all infants treated for ROP (except
1 outlier at 32 weeks GA and 1785 g BW), at a marginal cost per additional
person with improved vision of $513 081 for screening patients between
28 weeks GA and 1200 g BW, compared with $1 800 039 and $2 075 874
for using the current AAP and CPS guidelines, respectively (cryotherapy outcomes).
Results for laser therapy were similar, but costs were slightly lower. This
strategy reduced the number of infants screened under the current CPS guidelines
by 46%.
Conclusion Screening only infants having a BW of 1200 g or less is the most cost-effective
strategy for routine ROP screening.
From the Department of Pediatrics, University of British Columbia,
and the Centre for Community Health and Health Evaluation Research,Vancouver,
British Columbia (Dr Lee); the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine,
London, England (Dr Normand); the Department of Pediatrics, University of
Calgary, Alberta (Dr McMillan); the Department of Pediatrics, University of
Toronto, Ontario (Dr Ohlsson); the Department of Pediatrics, Dalhousie University,
Halifax, Nova Scotia (Dr Vincer); and the Department of Ophthalmology, University
of British Columbia (Dr Lyons).
Corresponding author and reprints: Shoo K. Lee, MBBS, FRCPC, PhD,
Canadian Neonatal Network, Canadian Neonatal Network Coordinating Centre,
4480 Oak St, Room E-414, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6H 3V4 (e-mail: shool{at}interchange.ubc.ca).
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
 |
Characteristics of severe retinopathy of prematurity patients in China: a repeat of the first epidemic?
Chen and Li
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2006;90:268-271.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
UK population based study of severe retinopathy of prematurity: screening, treatment, and outcome
Haines et al.
Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2005;90:F240-f244.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Characteristics of Infants With Severe Retinopathy of Prematurity in Countries With Low, Moderate, and High Levels of Development: Implications for Screening Programs
Gilbert et al.
Pediatrics 2005;115:e518-e525.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Cost-Effectiveness of Inhaled Nitric Oxide for the Management of Persistent Pulmonary Hypertension of the Newborn
Lorch et al.
Pediatrics 2004;114:417-426.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Causes of severe visual impairment and blindness in children in Ethiopia
Vedantham and Ratnagiri
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2003;87:1432-1432.
FULL TEXT
Retinopathy of prematurity: recent advances in our understanding
Wheatley et al.
Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2002;87:F78-82.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Retinopathy of prematurity: recent advances in our understanding
Wheatley et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2002;86:696-700.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Comparison of the Hyperoxic Test and the Alternate Breath Test in Infants
BOUFERRACHE et al.
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2002;165:206-210.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|