The cost effectiveness of strategies to reduce barriers to cataract surgery
dc.contributor.author | Ellwein, Leon B. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Lepkowski, James M. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Thulasiraj, R. D. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Brilliant, Girija E. | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2006-09-08T20:54:33Z | |
dc.date.available | 2006-09-08T20:54:33Z | |
dc.date.issued | 1991-05 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Ellwein, Leon B.; Lepkowski, James M.; Thulasiraj, R. D.; Brilliant, Girija E.; (1991). "The cost effectiveness of strategies to reduce barriers to cataract surgery." International Ophthalmology 15(3): 175-183. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/42956> | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0165-5701 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1573-2630 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/42956 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=1904845&dopt=citation | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | The cost and effectiveness of eight approaches to reducing barriers to cataract surgery were evaluated in a rural area of South India during 1987–1989. The approaches were based on four intervention alternativesaphakic motivator (AM), basic eye health worker (BW), screening van (SV), and mass media (MM). Each intervention was offered at two levels of economic incentive: partial, which provides free surgery and hospital stay, and full, which also provides transport from the recipient's village to the hospital and free food during the hospital stay. Evaluations took place in a probability selection of 90 villages, including ten control villages not subjected to either of the interventions. Only costs unique to patients from the intervention villages were considered: Health education and screening costs were included, surgery costs were not. Percentage reductions in the cataract blind backlog and increases in surgical coverage were used as effectiveness measures. Analyses suggest that the SV and AM interventions, both with full economic incentive, offer the greatest advantage. The AM intervention is the more effective of the two, but also the more costly. | en_US |
dc.format.extent | 755366 bytes | |
dc.format.extent | 3115 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.format.mimetype | text/plain | |
dc.language.iso | en_US | |
dc.publisher | Kluwer Academic Publishers; Springer Science+Business Media | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Medicine & Public Health | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Ophthalmology | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Cost-effectiveness | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Cataract Blindness | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Vision Screening | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Health Education Interventions | en_US |
dc.title | The cost effectiveness of strategies to reduce barriers to cataract surgery | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Ophthalmology | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Health Sciences | en_US |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | Institute for Social Research, the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationother | University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA; University of Nebraska Medical Center, 600 South 42nd Street, NE 68198-6545, Omaha, USA | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationother | Aravind Eye Hospital, Madurai, Tamil Nadu, India | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationother | Seva Foundation, San Anselmo, California, USA | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationumcampus | Ann Arbor | en_US |
dc.identifier.pmid | 1904845 | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/42956/1/10792_2004_Article_BF00153924.pdf | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00153924 | en_US |
dc.identifier.source | International Ophthalmology | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.