Establishing a method to estimate the effect of antimyopia management options on lifetime cost of myopia

BACKGROUND: Informed decisions on myopia management require an understanding of financial impact. We describe methodology for estimating lifetime myopia costs, with comparison across management options, using exemplars in Australia and China. METHODS: We demonstrate a process for modelling lifetime costs of traditional myopia management (TMM=full, single-vision correction) and active myopia management (AMM) options with clinically meaningful treatment efficacy. Evidence-based, location-specific and ethnicity-specific progression data determined the likelihood of all possible refractive outcomes. Myopia care costs were collected from published sources and key informants. Refractive and ocular health decisions were based on standard clinical protocols that responded to the speed of progression, level of myopia, and associated risks of pathology and vision impairment. We used the progressions, costs, protocols and risks to estimate and compare lifetime cost of myopia under each scenario and tested the effect of 0%, 3% and 5% annual discounting, where discounting adjusts future costs to 2020 value. RESULTS: Low-dose atropine, antimyopia spectacles, antimyopia multifocal soft contact lenses and orthokeratology met our AMM inclusion criteria. Lifetime cost for TMM with 3% discounting was US7437 (CI US4953 to US10 740) in Australia and US8006 (CI US3026 to US13 707) in China. The lowest lifetime cost options with 3% discounting were antimyopia spectacles (US7280, CI US5246 to US9888) in Australia and low-dose atropine (US4453, CI US2136 to US9115) in China. CONCLUSIONS: Financial investment in AMM during childhood may be balanced or exceeded across a lifetime by reduced refractive progression, simpler lenses, and reduced risk of pathology and vision loss. Our methodology can be applied to estimate cost in comparable scenarios.