0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Socioeconomics and Health Services |

Impact of Vision Loss on Costs and Outcomes in Medicare Beneficiaries With Glaucoma FREE

Thomas Bramley, PhD; Patti Peeples, PhD; John G. Walt, MBA; Marta Juhasz, MSPH; Jan E. Hansen, PhD
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations:Xcenda, Salt Lake City, Utah (Dr Bramley); Xcenda, Palm Harbor, Florida (Drs Peeples and Juhasz); and Allergan, Inc, Irvine, California (Mr Walt and Dr Hansen).


Section Editor: Paul P. Lee, MD

More Author Information
Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126(6):849-856. doi:10.1001/archopht.126.6.849.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Objective  To assess the impact of vision loss severity on costs and health outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries with glaucoma.

Methods  A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using Medicare claims. Patients were stratified into 4 categories: no vision loss, moderate vision loss, severe vision loss, and blindness. Outcomes of interest were mean annual medical costs by category, component costs, and frequency of depression, falls and/or accidents, injury, femur fracture, and nursing home placement.

Results  Multivariate regression analysis showed that patients with any degree of vision loss had 46.7% higher total costs compared with patients without vision loss. Mean total and component costs increased with onset and severity ($8157 for no vision loss to $18 670 for blindness). Patients with vision loss were significantly more likely to be placed in a nursing home (odds ratio = 2.18; 95% confidence interval, 2.06-2.31), develop depression (odds ratio = 1.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.54-1.73), fracture a femur (odds ratio = 1.67; 95% confidence interval, 1.53-2.83), or experience a fall or accident (odds ratio = 1.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.50-1.68) vs patients without vision loss.

Conclusions  Vision loss in glaucoma is costly, and costs increase with severity. There is significantly increased risk of nursing home admission, depression, falls and/or accidents, injury, or femur fracture with vision loss compared with no vision loss.

Figures in this Article

More than 3.3 million Americans had visual impairment or blindness in 2004; glaucoma, a chronic optic neuropathy, is a leading cause of vision impairment.1Loss of vision is feared more than human immunodeficiency virus and AIDS, cancer, stroke,2or death.3Visual impairment increases risks of falls and accidents,4,5hip fractures,613injury,4,1417motor vehicle crashes,4,18,19nursing home placement,5,8,20and mortality.21,22Moreover, inadequate vision is related to functional status decline2327and depression.2832

The economic burden of all visual disorders to the United States was estimated at $35.4 billion, with a governmental budgetary impact of $13.7 billion (2005 US dollars).33These estimates do not include costs of associated comorbidities (depression, traumatic injury) or eye-related well care and were not stratified by vision loss cause.

Because glaucoma is responsible for approximately 3 of every 4 cases of visual impairment and is predominantly a disease of the elderly,34its cost impact is highly important to Medicare. Numerous glaucoma-specific burden of illness studies have been conducted.5,3538However, some are limited by the patient population studied (eg, end-stage glaucoma only,37non-Medicare patients36,37), method of glaucoma severity staging,35and reliance on chart review methods35,37that measure prescribed—not consumed—resource use. Another study lacked visual loss severity stratification,37and there is substantial evidence that costs and adverse consequences increase with visual impairment severity.5,35,36,3946Each of these considerations limits the applicability and generalizability of results.

A retrospective claims analysis conducted by Javitt et al5described an epidemiologically validated vision loss severity categorization using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification(ICD-9-CM)47codes for vision loss. An estimated $2.14 billion in non–eye-related medical care costs was attributed to blindness and vision loss in 2003, and 27% to 41% of excess vision loss costs were due to increased risk of depression, injury, skilled nursing facility use, and long-term care facility admission. The study, although important and methodologically sound, included Medicare beneficiaries aged 69 years or older with vision loss from any cause, used data spanning 1999 to 2003, and did not show costs by resource use category.

A more current estimate of total and component costs is needed to better understand the full economic implications of glaucoma-specific vision loss to Medicare and to determine the impact of these costs by severity. With the recent emphasis by Medicare on glaucoma awareness and disease progression,4850it is imperative to document the risk of associated adverse consequences (depression, injury, femur fracture, and nursing home admission) stratified by vision loss in a glaucoma population. Therefore, the objective of this research was to assess the impact of vision loss severity on costs and health outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries with glaucoma.

DATA SOURCE

This retrospective cohort analysis was conducted with the frequently used51,52and nationally representative Medicare 5% random sample, which contains covered inpatient and outpatient fee-for-service claims for beneficiaries aged 65 years or older. Data elements are derived from discharge records and contain unique identifier-linked medical claims and charges for inpatient hospitalization, physician visits, injectable medications, and services related to laboratory, skilled nursing facility, ambulatory surgery, home health, and hospice care in addition to mortality records. The study database was developed using a limited data set with masked patient identifiers, and materials were handled in compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.

PATIENT SELECTION

Because the analytic file provided dates of service by quarter rather than specific day, inclusion criteria reflected quarter date stamping. Patients aged 65 years or older with a new diagnosis of glaucoma (index diagnosis, ICD-9-CMcode 365.x) between the third quarter in 1999 and the fourth quarter in 2004 and with continuous Medicare enrollment in the 2 quarters prior to and 5 quarters after index diagnosis were selected, as this approximated 1 year of follow-up. Individuals with health maintenance organization enrollment or who died prior to the end of the minimally required 5-quarter follow-up period were excluded.

COHORT ASSIGNMENT

Patients were stratified into 4 mutually exclusive categories based on their worst degree of vision loss during follow-up using 57 ICD-9-CMcodes previously described and validated by Javitt et al5: no vision loss, moderate vision loss (ICD-9-CMcodes 369.6-369.9), severe vision loss (ICD-9-CMcodes 369.1-369.4), and blindness (ICD-9-CMcodes 369.0-369.08).

COST CATEGORIES

The direct medical cost analysis was from the Medicare perspective and included the amount reimbursed to the provider, excluding premiums, deductibles, and co-pays. Inpatient, outpatient, rehabilitation, physician visit, office-administered pharmaceutical, laboratory, skilled nursing facility care (≤ 100 days), hospice, and home health care costs were included. Because Medicare did not cover outpatient prescription drugs at the time of study conduct, these costs were excluded. Costs were adjusted for inflation using the medical care Consumer Price Index and are presented in 2007 US dollars.53

OUTCOMES ASSESSED

The primary cost outcome variable was the adjusted mean total annual health care costs in the postindex period by vision loss category. Component costs—inpatient, outpatient, emergency, physician, and other—were compared between cohorts. Other outcomes included incident depression, falls and/or accidents, injury, femur fracture, and nursing home placement (ie, admission to a skilled nursing facility or long-term care facility) and were based on ICD-9-CMcodes (Table 1).

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical ModificationCodes to Define Adverse Events of Interest

Risk assessments for nursing home placement and depression were conducted on the population at risk at the time of index vision loss diagnosis; therefore, only patients who did not have the event of interest at that point were included. For falls or accidents, injury, and femur fracture, patients with prior events were not excluded.

COMORBIDITY ASSESSMENT

Comorbidities were assessed using the valid and reliable5457Charlson comorbidity score with Deyo modification.58,59The calculated Deyo-Charlson Index score ranges from 0 to 29 with higher scores representing a higher burden of comorbidity, defined as the cumulative increased likelihood of 1-year mortality.

STATISTICAL ANALYSES

Univariate analyses of frequencies, medians, and means with standard deviations were performed to describe the study population. Statistical differences between vision loss cohorts were assessed using χ2tests of proportionality for categorical variables and analysis of variance for continuous variables.

Ordinary least squares regression models estimated and compared mean annual total and component health care costs between cohorts during the 5 quarters of follow-up from the index date. Five quarters approximated 1 year owing to the varying dates of initiation within the entry quarter. To produce the best fit, each model was adjusted for a subset of covariates found to be significantly associated with the costs. Covariates considered for analysis were age, sex, race, geographic region, presence of neurological disorders or inpatient claims in the preindex period, Deyo-Charlson Index score, sum of all existing diagnoses in the preindex period, and total costs in the preindex period. For patients with some degree of vision loss, the index date was reassigned as the date of first diagnostic evidence of the most severe vision loss. For those with no vision loss, the index date remained the first medical claim for glaucoma diagnosis. In the cost analyses, the mean overall cost per patient was first calculated for each group. When using statistical inference through modeling, cost variables were log transformed to adjust for the highly right-skewed distribution typical of cost data.60The reference group for statistical comparison was beneficiaries with no evidence of vision loss during follow-up.

Separate stepwise parsimonious binary logistic regression models were derived to assess differences in the risk of experiencing each secondary outcome event, controlling for baseline covariates that may have impacted risk between those with vision loss and those with no vision loss. Odds ratios (ORs) of their occurrence and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were derived. Baseline covariates considered were age, sex, race, geographic region, preindex comorbid diseases (dementia, Alzheimer disease, Parkinson disease, depression), Deyo-Charlson Index score, unique count of disease states beyond those considered in the Deyo-Charlson Index, and number of preindex inpatient claims. Variables that were significant at P < .05 were retained in the models. Pvalues were considered significant when the 2-sided value was less than .05. All of the analyses were carried out using SAS version 9.1 statistical software (SAS Institute, Inc, Cary, North Carolina).

STUDY POPULATION AND PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS

A total of 365 345 Medicare beneficiaries with glaucoma met the inclusion criteria. Excluded were 50.2% (n = 183 423) owing to the following: death prior to the end of the 5-quarter follow-up period (n = 15 846); health maintenance organization enrollment (n = 22 904); or lack of continuous eligibility or complete data availability during the preindex and postindex periods (n = 144 673). Thus, 181 922 patients with glaucoma were categorized into vision loss cohorts: the majority (92.1%) as having no vision loss, 4.3% as having moderate vision loss, 1.9% as having severe vision loss, and 1.7% as blind. Table 2shows patient characteristics of the study population.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Patient Characteristics of 181922 Medicare Beneficiaries With Glaucoma by Vision Loss Cohort
HEALTH CARE COSTS

The simple mean total and component health care costs increased with onset and degree of vision loss, ranging from $8157 for no vision loss to $18 670 for blindness (Figure 1). Onset of moderate vision loss was associated with a $5005 increase in costs compared with those with glaucoma but no vision loss ($13 162 vs $8157, respectively). The cost for patients with severe vision loss was $7155 more than that for patients without any degree of vision loss, whereas the cost for blind patients was $10 513 higher than that for patients without vision loss.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 1.

Mean total and component annual health care costs per patient after index by vision loss cohort (n = 181 922). Total costs are not always equal to the sum of component costs because of rounding. Each component cost is rounded to the nearest integer, and the total cost is rounded to the nearest integer separately.

Graphic Jump Location

Results from the covariate-adjusted multivariate regression analysis showed that patients with any degree of vision loss had 46.7% higher total costs compared with patients without vision loss (P < .001) (Table 3).

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Results of Regression Modeling to Estimate Annual Costs
EVENT RISK

Frequency of events invariably increased with greater vision loss for all of the investigated events (Figure 2). In blind patients, 25.3% were placed in nursing homes, 17.0% had incident depression, 15.5% experienced a fall and/or accident, 16.9% sustained injury, and 7.0% fractured a femur. Conversely, in patients with no vision loss, no single event exceeded 7.8% in the total population.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 2.

Frequency of events by vision loss cohort.

Graphic Jump Location

Patients with vision loss were significantly more likely to be placed in a nursing home (OR = 2.18; 95% CI, 2.06-2.31) and to develop depression (OR = 1.63; 95% CI, 1.54-1.73) compared with patients with no vision loss. Additionally, they were 67.4% more likely to fracture a femur (OR = 1.67; 95% CI, 1.53-1.83) and 58.6% more likely to experience a fall or accident (OR = 1.59; 95% CI, 1.50-1.68) vs the reference group. In addition, there was a 33.4% higher risk of injury associated with vision loss (OR = 1.33; 95% CI, 1.27-1.41) compared with no vision loss. The odds of an individual with vision loss experiencing selected adverse events during the postindex period compared with patients with no vision loss, adjusted for all of the significant predictor variables, are shown in Table 4.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Results of Logistic Modeling to Assess Risk of Events Associated With Vision Loss

The progressive nature of glaucoma and permanence of vision loss48make it an important disease to properly manage with early intervention. Results from this study showed that as visual field limitations increased, resource consumption, adverse consequences, and intensity of care also increased. Medicare beneficiaries with glaucoma who experienced any degree of ICD-9-CM–coded vision loss had significantly higher covariate-adjusted total health care costs than patients without vision loss. Both total and component costs progressively increased with escalating severity of vision loss.

Most economic analyses within glaucoma evaluated costs associated with glaucoma severity rather than vision loss or patient-rated impairment. Javitt et al5were the first to describe the vision loss categories used in our study, and their research estimated overall average annual non–eye-related costs in 2003 US dollars as $5954 to $7527 for no vision loss, $10 050 to $14 876 for moderate vision loss, $14 311 to $15 250 for severe vision loss, and $14 905 to $19 366 for blindness. In general, our average annual total (including eye-related care) costs were similar: $8157 for no vision loss; $13 162 for moderate vision loss; $15 312 for severe vision loss; and $18 670 for blindness (2007 US dollars). There are some important methodological differences between our study and the research by Javitt and colleagues. Of the patients in their study sample, 37% to 43% had a glaucoma diagnosis and 38% to 66% had macular degeneration compared with 100% of the patients with glaucoma in our study. Our analysis included all health care costs, whereas Javitt and colleagues segmented costs by eye-related and non–eye-related costs and also investigated incremental vision loss costs. We show mean costs from 1999 to 2005 for year 1 after diagnosis of initial vision loss or glaucoma (for the cohort with no vision loss); Javitt and colleagues derived annualized data during 4 years of follow-up with either stable or progressive vision loss (in 1999-2003).

Similar to our economic burden findings with vision loss severity, numerous studies have shown that glaucoma severity is associated with increased treatment costs.35,36,3946Lee et al35found that patients with ocular hypertension or earliest-phase glaucoma had mean annual eye-related direct medical costs of $623 (2001 US dollars), rising to $2511 for those with end-stage disease (typically blindness), which were slightly higher than the eye-related costs in Medicare beneficiaries described by Javitt et al5that excluded prescription drugs. Kobelt-Nguyen et al44found that mean 2-year costs for glaucoma were $2188 (1995 US dollars) and increased with severity.

The primary driver of total cost was inpatient visits, increasing by severity (52.5%-69.4% of total costs). Physician visit costs ranged from 9.0% (blindness) to 23.1% (no vision loss) of total costs. Others42have found that component costs for patients with open-angle glaucoma were dominated by procedures (45% of total costs) and physician visits (43%). As severity increased, physician visit costs decreased to 38% and procedure costs increased to 50%. Outpatient prescription medications were not included in our study because they were not covered by Medicare at the time of the study. The advent of Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage will likely increase the total cost estimate, and other studies36,39,40have estimated medication component costs to be dependent on disease severity41and highly variable, ranging from 12%42to 61%.35

The adjusted risk of nursing home placement was 2.18 times higher for patients with any vision loss compared with individuals with no vision loss, confirming results from other studies.5,8,20Our results of a 33.4% increased risk of injury, 58.6% increased risk of falls and accidents, and 67.4% increased risk of femur fracture are also within the parameter risk estimates by other researchers.5,8Haymes et al4found that compared with control subjects, patients with glaucoma had more than a 3-fold higher risk of falls in the previous year. Colón-Emeric et al13found that glaucoma was significantly associated with hip fracture risk in ambulatory men (OR = 2.6; 95% CI, 1.0-6.2).

Studies show that approximately one-third of visually impaired older individuals report clinically significant depressive symptoms,2830,6163and rates are significantly higher than those in the healthy population of similar age and are similar to or greater than those in other medically ill elderly individuals.2832Our analysis found a 63.0% increased risk of depression diagnosis, similar to the depression risk increases of 40% to 80% found by Javitt et al.5Numerous other studies found links between vision loss and depression, family dysfunction, and marital problems2832and between depression and physical functioning.64

Several limitations should be considered when interpreting the results of this study. The data source was administrative claims and the design was retrospective; thus, causality cannot be ascribed. Although numerous other studies have shown similar trends with costs and adverse consequences, the possibility cannot be ruled out that factors other than visual loss severity were responsible for differences in outcomes.

The Medicare 5% analytic sample did not include outpatient medications or long-term care and may limit generalizability of the results to the non-Medicare population, to elderly individuals who do not receive their primary health care through Medicare, or to the post–Medicare Part D period. However, the Medicare 5% analytic database is a representative reflection of those individuals aged 65 years or older with glaucoma who receive medical care through Medicare coverage. Moreover, median glaucoma-associated costs have been shown to be similar for patients younger than 65 years compared with patients aged 65 years or older.36

Derived costs represented first-year postdiagnosis total health care cost, reflecting a snapshot in time rather than longitudinal costs, and were not specifically attributed to vision loss. Year 1 costs have been shown to be both lower35and higher36,37,39in patients with glaucoma compared with post–year 1 costs. Severity-associated costs may have been due to other diseases coexisting with visual loss deterioration, and differences in outcomes may have been affected if cohorts were not equally balanced with respect to these factors. To moderate this effect, the multivariate cost and risk statistical analyses controlled for age, sex, preindex health care utilization, and other confounders.

The ICD-9-CMcodes were used for both glaucoma diagnosis and vision loss, and they are subject to the limitations in coding variance and projection of administrative claims data to larger populations.65,66The ICD-9-CM code 365.0 may be used for patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma suspects, and these patients typically have a much lower risk of current or future vision loss. As such, the cohort with no vision loss may not exclusively contain patients with confirmed glaucoma who have no vision loss, thus the estimated costs and risks for this category may be conservative. Although the vision loss categories used in our study have previously been described and validated against epidemiologic studies34by Javitt et al,5the possibility remains that the codes were not accurate reflections of either the presence of vision loss or vision loss gradations. Further, the severity categorizations are susceptible to individual clinician judgment, which introduces a degree of interrater reliability and variance.

The risk of blindness or significant, permanent loss of visual field in glaucoma is costly, and the total direct medical and component costs increase with vision loss severity. There is a significant increase in the risk of major adverse consequences such as nursing home admission, depression, falls and accidents, injury, or femur fracture with any degree of vision loss compared with no vision loss.

Correspondence:Thomas Bramley, PhD, Xcenda, 1528 Preston St, Salt Lake City, UT 84108 (thomas.bramley@xcenda.com).

Submitted for Publication:August 23, 2007; final revision received December 20, 2007; accepted January 3, 2008.

Financial Disclosure:None reported.

Author Contributions:Dr Bramley had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Funding/Support:This work was supported by Allergan, Inc.

Additional Contributions:Elizabeth Davis, PhD, contributed to the development of the manuscript, and Laurie Kozbelt, MA, contributed to the preparation of the manuscript.

Resnikoff  SPascolini  DEtya’ale  D  et al.  Global data on visual impairment in the year 2002. Bull World Health Organ 2004;82 (11) 844- 851
PubMed
 Vision 2007 Survey AFB: Americans fear impact of vision loss more than cancer. Vision Monday. May21 2007;2106http://www.visionmonday.com/articles/details.asp?ID=16808. Accessed May 31, 2007
Lions Clubs International Foundation, US adults with diabetes fear blindness or vision loss more than premature death: many respondents in international diabetes survey worried about quality of life. http://www.lionsclubs.org/EN/content/news_news_release58.stm. Accessed May 29, 2007
Haymes  SALeBlanc  RPNicolela  MTChiasson  LAChauhan  BC Risk of falls and motor vehicle collisions in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2007;48 (3) 1149- 1155
PubMed Link to Article
Javitt  JCZhou  ZWillke  RJ Association between vision loss and higher medical care costs in Medicare beneficiaries: costs are greater for those with progressive vision loss. Ophthalmology 2007;114 (2) 238- 245
PubMed Link to Article
Cummings  SRNevitt  MCBrowner  WS  et al. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group, Risk factors for hip fracture in white women. N Engl J Med 1995;332 (12) 767- 773
PubMed Link to Article
Felson  DTAnderson  JJHannan  MTMilton  RCWilson  PWKiel  DP Impaired vision and hip fracture: the Framingham Study. J Am Geriatr Soc 1989;37 (6) 495- 500
PubMed
Klein  BEMoss  SEKlein  RLee  KECruickshanks  KJ Associations of visual function with physical outcomes and limitations 5 years later in an older population: the Beaver Dam eye study. Ophthalmology 2003;110 (4) 644- 650
PubMed Link to Article
Chan  KMPang  WSEe  CHDing  YYChoo  P Epidemiology of falls among the elderly community dwellers in Singapore. Singapore Med J 1997;38 (10) 427- 431
PubMed
Nevitt  MCCummings  SRKidd  SBlack  D Risk factors for recurrent nonsyncopal falls: a prospective study. JAMA 1989;261 (18) 2663- 2668
PubMed Link to Article
Lord  SRWard  JAWilliams  PAnstey  KJ Physiological factors associated with falls in older community-dwelling women. J Am Geriatr Soc 1994;42 (10) 1110- 1117
PubMed
Ivers  RQCumming  RGMitchell  PAttebo  K Visual impairment and falls in older adults: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. J Am Geriatr Soc 1998;46 (1) 58- 64
PubMed
Colón-Emeric  CSBiggs  DPSchenck  APLyles  KW Risk factors for hip fracture in skilled nursing facilities: who should be evaluated? Osteoporos Int 2003;14 (6) 484- 489
PubMed Link to Article
Szlyk  JPMahler  CLSeiple  WEdward  DPWilensky  JT Driving performance of glaucoma patients correlates with peripheral visual field loss. J Glaucoma 2005;14 (2) 145- 150
PubMed Link to Article
Sims  RV McGwin  G  JrAllman  RMBall  KOwsley  C Exploratory study of incident vehicle crashes among older drivers. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2000;55 (1) M22- M27
PubMed Link to Article
Owsley  C McGwin  G  JrBall  K Vision impairment, eye disease, and injurious motor vehicle crashes in the elderly. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 1998;5 (2) 101- 113
PubMed Link to Article
Owsley  CStalvey  BTWells  JSloane  ME McGwin  G  Jr Visual risk factors for crash involvement in older drivers with cataract. Arch Ophthalmol 2001;119 (6) 881- 887
PubMed Link to Article
Owsley  C McGwin  G  Jr Vision impairment and driving. Surv Ophthalmol 1999;43 (6) 535- 550
PubMed Link to Article
Wood  JM Aging, driving and vision. Clin Exp Optom 2002;85 (4) 214- 220
PubMed Link to Article
Wang  JJMitchell  PCumming  RGSmith  W Visual impairment and nursing home placement in older Australians: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2003;10 (1) 3- 13
PubMed Link to Article
Pedula  KLColeman  ALHillier  TA  et al. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group, Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and mortality in older women: study of osteoporotic fractures. J Am Geriatr Soc 2006;54 (12) 1871- 1877
PubMed Link to Article
Freeman  EEEgleston  BLWest  SKBandeen-Roche  KRubin  G Visual acuity change and mortality in older adults. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2005;46 (11) 4040- 4045
PubMed Link to Article
Bess  FHLichtenstein  MJLogan  SABurger  MCNelson  E Hearing impairment as a determinant of function in the elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc 1989;37 (2) 123- 128
PubMed
Rudberg  MAFurner  SEDunn  JECassel  CK The relationship of visual and hearing impairments to disability: an analysis using the longitudinal study of aging. J Gerontol 1993;48 (6) M261- M265
PubMed Link to Article
West  SKMunoz  BRubin  GS  et al.  Function and visual impairment in a population-based study of older adults: the SEE project: Salisbury Eye Evaluation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1997;38 (1) 72- 82
PubMed
Salive  MEGuralnik  JGlynn  RJChristen  WWallace  RBOstfeld  AM Association of visual impairment with mobility and physical function. J Am Geriatr Soc 1994;42 (3) 287- 292
PubMed
Rubin  GSBandeen-Roche  KHuang  GH  et al.  The association of multiple visual impairments with self-reported visual disability: SEE project. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2001;42 (1) 64- 72
PubMed
Brody  BLGamst  ACWilliams  RA  et al.  Depression, visual acuity, comorbidity, and disability associated with age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 2001;108 (10) 1893- 1900
PubMed Link to Article
Rovner  BWCasten  RJ Activity loss and depression in age-related macular degeneration. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2002;10 (3) 305- 310
PubMed Link to Article
Rovner  BWCasten  RJTasman  WS Effect of depression on vision function in age-related macular degeneration. Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120 (8) 1041- 1044
PubMed Link to Article
Bernbaum  MAlbert  SGDuckro  PNMerkel  W Personal and family stress in individuals with diabetes and vision loss. J Clin Psychol 1993;49 (5) 670- 677
PubMed Link to Article
Bernbaum  MAlbert  SGDuckro  PN Psychosocial profiles in patients with visual impairment due to diabetic retinopathy. Diabetes Care 1988;11 (7) 551- 557
PubMed Link to Article
Rein  DBZhang  PWirth  KE  et al.  The economic burden of major adult visual disorders in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124 (12) 1754- 1760
PubMed Link to Article
Friedman  DSWolfs  RCO’Colmain  BJ  et al. Eye Diseases Prevalence Research Group, Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma among adults in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122 (4) 532- 538
PubMed Link to Article
Lee  PPWalt  JGDoyle  JJ  et al.  A multicenter, retrospective pilot study of resource use and costs associated with severity of disease in glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124 (1) 12- 19
PubMed Link to Article
Lee  PPLevin  LAWalt  JG  et al.  Cost of patients with primary open-angle glaucoma: a retrospective study of commercial insurance claims data. Ophthalmology 2007;114 (7) 1241- 1247
PubMed Link to Article
Gieser  DKTracy Williams  RO’Connell  W  et al.  Costs and utilization of end-stage glaucoma patients receiving visual rehabilitation care: a US multisite retrospective study. J Glaucoma 2006;15 (5) 419- 425
PubMed Link to Article
Ellwein  LBUrato  CJ Use of eye care and associated charges among the Medicare population: 1991-1998. Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120 (6) 804- 811
PubMed Link to Article
Iskedjian  MWalker  JVicente  C  et al.  Cost of glaucoma in Canada: analyses based on visual field and physician's assessment. J Glaucoma 2003;12 (6) 456- 462
PubMed Link to Article
Oostenbrink  JBRutten-van Mölken  MPSluyter-Opdenoordt  TS Resource use and costs of patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension: a one-year study based on retrospective chart review in the Netherlands. J Glaucoma 2001;10 (3) 184- 191
PubMed Link to Article
Traverso  CEWalt  JGKelly  SP  et al.  Direct costs of glaucoma and severity of disease: a multinational long term study of resource utilization in Europe. Br J Ophthalmol 2005;89 (10) 1245- 1249
PubMed Link to Article
Vicente  CWalker  JBuys  YEinarson  TRCovert  DIskedjian  M Association between mean intraocular pressure, disease stability and cost of treating glaucoma in Canada. Curr Med Res Opin 2004;20 (8) 1245- 1251
PubMed Link to Article
Wang  JCChew  PT What is the direct cost of treatment of acute primary angle closure glaucoma? the Singapore model. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2004;32 (6) 578- 583
PubMed Link to Article
Kobelt-Nguyen  GGerdtham  UGAlm  A Costs of treating primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension: a retrospective, observational two-year chart review of newly diagnosed patients in Sweden and the United States. J Glaucoma 1998;7 (2) 95- 104
PubMed Link to Article
Kobelt  GJönsson  LGerdtham  UKrieglstein  GK Direct costs of glaucoma management following initiation of medical therapy: a simulation model based on an observational study of glaucoma treatment in Germany. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1998;236 (11) 811- 821
PubMed Link to Article
Oostenbrink  JBRutten-van Mölken  MPOpdenoordt  TS The treatment of newly diagnosed patients with glaucoma or with ocular hypertension in The Netherlands: an observational study of costs and initial treatment success based on retrospective chart review. Doc Ophthalmol 1999;98 (3) 285- 299
PubMed Link to Article
American Medical Association, International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification. 1-2 Chicago, IL American Medical Association2001;
American Academy of Ophthalmology, Primary open-angle glaucoma suspect preferred practice pattern. http://www.aao.org/education/library/ppp/poags_new.cfm. Accessed September 28, 2006
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Medicare coverage of skilled nursing facility care. http://www.medicare.gov/publications/pubs/pdf/snf.pdf. Accessed May 25, 2007
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, January is National Glaucoma Awareness Month. http://www.medicarenhic.com/whats_new/current/glaucomamonth_0107.htm. Accessed May 30, 2007
Lave  JRPashos  CLAnderson  GF  et al.  Costing medical care: using Medicare administrative data. Med Care 1994;32 (7) ((suppl)) JS77- JS89
PubMed Link to Article
Brandeis  JPashos  CLHenning  JMLitwin  MS A nationwide charge comparison of the principal treatments for early stage prostate carcinoma. Cancer 2000;89 (8) 1792- 1799
PubMed Link to Article
Bureau of Labor Statistics, US Department of Labor, Annual change in the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers, medical care, 1996-2005. http://stats.bls.gov/opub/ted/2006/jun/wk3/art02.txt. Accessed May 28, 2007
Bernardini  JCallen  SFried  LPiraino  B Inter-rater reliability and annual rescoring of the Charlson comorbidity index. Adv Perit Dial 2004;20125- 127
PubMed
Roos  LLSharp  SMCohen  MM Comparing clinical information with claims data: some similarities and differences. J Clin Epidemiol 1991;44 (9) 881- 888
PubMed Link to Article
Roos  LLSharp  SMCohen  MMWajda  A Risk adjustment in claims-based research: the search for efficient approaches. J Clin Epidemiol 1989;42 (12) 1193- 1206
PubMed Link to Article
O'Connor  GTPlume  SKOlmstead  EM  et al. Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group, A regional prospective study of in-hospital mortality associated with coronary artery bypass grafting. JAMA 1991;266 (6) 803- 809
PubMed Link to Article
Deyo  RACherkin  DCCiol  MA Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45 (6) 613- 619
PubMed Link to Article
Charlson  MEPompei  PAles  KLMacKenzie  CR A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40 (5) 373- 383
PubMed Link to Article
Dodd  SBassi  ABodger  KWilliamson  P A comparison of multivariable regression models to analyze cost data. J Eval Clin Pract 2006;12 (1) 76- 86
PubMed Link to Article
Horowitz  AReinhardt  JPBoerner  KTravis  LA The influence of health, social support quality, and rehabilitation on depression among disabled elders. Aging Ment Health 2003;7 (5) 342- 350
PubMed Link to Article
Reinhardt  JP Effects of positive and negative support received and provided on adaptation to chronic physical impairment. Appl Dev Sci 2001;5 (2) 76- 85
Link to Article
Rovner  BWZisselman  PMSchmuely-Dulitzki  Y Depression and disability in older people with impaired vision: a follow-up study. J Am Geriatr Soc 1996;44 (2) 181- 184
PubMed
Zeiss  AMLewinsohn  PMRohde  PSeeley  JR Relationship of physical disease and functional impairment to depression in older people. Psychol Aging 1996;11 (4) 572- 581
PubMed Link to Article
Coleman  ALMorgenstern  H Use of insurance claims databases to evaluate the outcomes of ophthalmic surgery. Surv Ophthalmol 1997;42 (3) 271- 278
PubMed Link to Article
Mitchell  JBBubolz  TPaul  JE  et al.  Using Medicare claims for outcomes research. Med Care 1994;32 (7) ((suppl)) JS38- JS51
PubMed Link to Article

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 1.

Mean total and component annual health care costs per patient after index by vision loss cohort (n = 181 922). Total costs are not always equal to the sum of component costs because of rounding. Each component cost is rounded to the nearest integer, and the total cost is rounded to the nearest integer separately.

Graphic Jump Location
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 2.

Frequency of events by vision loss cohort.

Graphic Jump Location

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical ModificationCodes to Define Adverse Events of Interest
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Patient Characteristics of 181922 Medicare Beneficiaries With Glaucoma by Vision Loss Cohort
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Results of Regression Modeling to Estimate Annual Costs
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 4. Results of Logistic Modeling to Assess Risk of Events Associated With Vision Loss

References

Resnikoff  SPascolini  DEtya’ale  D  et al.  Global data on visual impairment in the year 2002. Bull World Health Organ 2004;82 (11) 844- 851
PubMed
 Vision 2007 Survey AFB: Americans fear impact of vision loss more than cancer. Vision Monday. May21 2007;2106http://www.visionmonday.com/articles/details.asp?ID=16808. Accessed May 31, 2007
Lions Clubs International Foundation, US adults with diabetes fear blindness or vision loss more than premature death: many respondents in international diabetes survey worried about quality of life. http://www.lionsclubs.org/EN/content/news_news_release58.stm. Accessed May 29, 2007
Haymes  SALeBlanc  RPNicolela  MTChiasson  LAChauhan  BC Risk of falls and motor vehicle collisions in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2007;48 (3) 1149- 1155
PubMed Link to Article
Javitt  JCZhou  ZWillke  RJ Association between vision loss and higher medical care costs in Medicare beneficiaries: costs are greater for those with progressive vision loss. Ophthalmology 2007;114 (2) 238- 245
PubMed Link to Article
Cummings  SRNevitt  MCBrowner  WS  et al. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group, Risk factors for hip fracture in white women. N Engl J Med 1995;332 (12) 767- 773
PubMed Link to Article
Felson  DTAnderson  JJHannan  MTMilton  RCWilson  PWKiel  DP Impaired vision and hip fracture: the Framingham Study. J Am Geriatr Soc 1989;37 (6) 495- 500
PubMed
Klein  BEMoss  SEKlein  RLee  KECruickshanks  KJ Associations of visual function with physical outcomes and limitations 5 years later in an older population: the Beaver Dam eye study. Ophthalmology 2003;110 (4) 644- 650
PubMed Link to Article
Chan  KMPang  WSEe  CHDing  YYChoo  P Epidemiology of falls among the elderly community dwellers in Singapore. Singapore Med J 1997;38 (10) 427- 431
PubMed
Nevitt  MCCummings  SRKidd  SBlack  D Risk factors for recurrent nonsyncopal falls: a prospective study. JAMA 1989;261 (18) 2663- 2668
PubMed Link to Article
Lord  SRWard  JAWilliams  PAnstey  KJ Physiological factors associated with falls in older community-dwelling women. J Am Geriatr Soc 1994;42 (10) 1110- 1117
PubMed
Ivers  RQCumming  RGMitchell  PAttebo  K Visual impairment and falls in older adults: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. J Am Geriatr Soc 1998;46 (1) 58- 64
PubMed
Colón-Emeric  CSBiggs  DPSchenck  APLyles  KW Risk factors for hip fracture in skilled nursing facilities: who should be evaluated? Osteoporos Int 2003;14 (6) 484- 489
PubMed Link to Article
Szlyk  JPMahler  CLSeiple  WEdward  DPWilensky  JT Driving performance of glaucoma patients correlates with peripheral visual field loss. J Glaucoma 2005;14 (2) 145- 150
PubMed Link to Article
Sims  RV McGwin  G  JrAllman  RMBall  KOwsley  C Exploratory study of incident vehicle crashes among older drivers. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2000;55 (1) M22- M27
PubMed Link to Article
Owsley  C McGwin  G  JrBall  K Vision impairment, eye disease, and injurious motor vehicle crashes in the elderly. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 1998;5 (2) 101- 113
PubMed Link to Article
Owsley  CStalvey  BTWells  JSloane  ME McGwin  G  Jr Visual risk factors for crash involvement in older drivers with cataract. Arch Ophthalmol 2001;119 (6) 881- 887
PubMed Link to Article
Owsley  C McGwin  G  Jr Vision impairment and driving. Surv Ophthalmol 1999;43 (6) 535- 550
PubMed Link to Article
Wood  JM Aging, driving and vision. Clin Exp Optom 2002;85 (4) 214- 220
PubMed Link to Article
Wang  JJMitchell  PCumming  RGSmith  W Visual impairment and nursing home placement in older Australians: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2003;10 (1) 3- 13
PubMed Link to Article
Pedula  KLColeman  ALHillier  TA  et al. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group, Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and mortality in older women: study of osteoporotic fractures. J Am Geriatr Soc 2006;54 (12) 1871- 1877
PubMed Link to Article
Freeman  EEEgleston  BLWest  SKBandeen-Roche  KRubin  G Visual acuity change and mortality in older adults. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2005;46 (11) 4040- 4045
PubMed Link to Article
Bess  FHLichtenstein  MJLogan  SABurger  MCNelson  E Hearing impairment as a determinant of function in the elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc 1989;37 (2) 123- 128
PubMed
Rudberg  MAFurner  SEDunn  JECassel  CK The relationship of visual and hearing impairments to disability: an analysis using the longitudinal study of aging. J Gerontol 1993;48 (6) M261- M265
PubMed Link to Article
West  SKMunoz  BRubin  GS  et al.  Function and visual impairment in a population-based study of older adults: the SEE project: Salisbury Eye Evaluation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1997;38 (1) 72- 82
PubMed
Salive  MEGuralnik  JGlynn  RJChristen  WWallace  RBOstfeld  AM Association of visual impairment with mobility and physical function. J Am Geriatr Soc 1994;42 (3) 287- 292
PubMed
Rubin  GSBandeen-Roche  KHuang  GH  et al.  The association of multiple visual impairments with self-reported visual disability: SEE project. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2001;42 (1) 64- 72
PubMed
Brody  BLGamst  ACWilliams  RA  et al.  Depression, visual acuity, comorbidity, and disability associated with age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 2001;108 (10) 1893- 1900
PubMed Link to Article
Rovner  BWCasten  RJ Activity loss and depression in age-related macular degeneration. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2002;10 (3) 305- 310
PubMed Link to Article
Rovner  BWCasten  RJTasman  WS Effect of depression on vision function in age-related macular degeneration. Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120 (8) 1041- 1044
PubMed Link to Article
Bernbaum  MAlbert  SGDuckro  PNMerkel  W Personal and family stress in individuals with diabetes and vision loss. J Clin Psychol 1993;49 (5) 670- 677
PubMed Link to Article
Bernbaum  MAlbert  SGDuckro  PN Psychosocial profiles in patients with visual impairment due to diabetic retinopathy. Diabetes Care 1988;11 (7) 551- 557
PubMed Link to Article
Rein  DBZhang  PWirth  KE  et al.  The economic burden of major adult visual disorders in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124 (12) 1754- 1760
PubMed Link to Article
Friedman  DSWolfs  RCO’Colmain  BJ  et al. Eye Diseases Prevalence Research Group, Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma among adults in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122 (4) 532- 538
PubMed Link to Article
Lee  PPWalt  JGDoyle  JJ  et al.  A multicenter, retrospective pilot study of resource use and costs associated with severity of disease in glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124 (1) 12- 19
PubMed Link to Article
Lee  PPLevin  LAWalt  JG  et al.  Cost of patients with primary open-angle glaucoma: a retrospective study of commercial insurance claims data. Ophthalmology 2007;114 (7) 1241- 1247
PubMed Link to Article
Gieser  DKTracy Williams  RO’Connell  W  et al.  Costs and utilization of end-stage glaucoma patients receiving visual rehabilitation care: a US multisite retrospective study. J Glaucoma 2006;15 (5) 419- 425
PubMed Link to Article
Ellwein  LBUrato  CJ Use of eye care and associated charges among the Medicare population: 1991-1998. Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120 (6) 804- 811
PubMed Link to Article
Iskedjian  MWalker  JVicente  C  et al.  Cost of glaucoma in Canada: analyses based on visual field and physician's assessment. J Glaucoma 2003;12 (6) 456- 462
PubMed Link to Article
Oostenbrink  JBRutten-van Mölken  MPSluyter-Opdenoordt  TS Resource use and costs of patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension: a one-year study based on retrospective chart review in the Netherlands. J Glaucoma 2001;10 (3) 184- 191
PubMed Link to Article
Traverso  CEWalt  JGKelly  SP  et al.  Direct costs of glaucoma and severity of disease: a multinational long term study of resource utilization in Europe. Br J Ophthalmol 2005;89 (10) 1245- 1249
PubMed Link to Article
Vicente  CWalker  JBuys  YEinarson  TRCovert  DIskedjian  M Association between mean intraocular pressure, disease stability and cost of treating glaucoma in Canada. Curr Med Res Opin 2004;20 (8) 1245- 1251
PubMed Link to Article
Wang  JCChew  PT What is the direct cost of treatment of acute primary angle closure glaucoma? the Singapore model. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2004;32 (6) 578- 583
PubMed Link to Article
Kobelt-Nguyen  GGerdtham  UGAlm  A Costs of treating primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension: a retrospective, observational two-year chart review of newly diagnosed patients in Sweden and the United States. J Glaucoma 1998;7 (2) 95- 104
PubMed Link to Article
Kobelt  GJönsson  LGerdtham  UKrieglstein  GK Direct costs of glaucoma management following initiation of medical therapy: a simulation model based on an observational study of glaucoma treatment in Germany. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1998;236 (11) 811- 821
PubMed Link to Article
Oostenbrink  JBRutten-van Mölken  MPOpdenoordt  TS The treatment of newly diagnosed patients with glaucoma or with ocular hypertension in The Netherlands: an observational study of costs and initial treatment success based on retrospective chart review. Doc Ophthalmol 1999;98 (3) 285- 299
PubMed Link to Article
American Medical Association, International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification. 1-2 Chicago, IL American Medical Association2001;
American Academy of Ophthalmology, Primary open-angle glaucoma suspect preferred practice pattern. http://www.aao.org/education/library/ppp/poags_new.cfm. Accessed September 28, 2006
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Medicare coverage of skilled nursing facility care. http://www.medicare.gov/publications/pubs/pdf/snf.pdf. Accessed May 25, 2007
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, January is National Glaucoma Awareness Month. http://www.medicarenhic.com/whats_new/current/glaucomamonth_0107.htm. Accessed May 30, 2007
Lave  JRPashos  CLAnderson  GF  et al.  Costing medical care: using Medicare administrative data. Med Care 1994;32 (7) ((suppl)) JS77- JS89
PubMed Link to Article
Brandeis  JPashos  CLHenning  JMLitwin  MS A nationwide charge comparison of the principal treatments for early stage prostate carcinoma. Cancer 2000;89 (8) 1792- 1799
PubMed Link to Article
Bureau of Labor Statistics, US Department of Labor, Annual change in the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers, medical care, 1996-2005. http://stats.bls.gov/opub/ted/2006/jun/wk3/art02.txt. Accessed May 28, 2007
Bernardini  JCallen  SFried  LPiraino  B Inter-rater reliability and annual rescoring of the Charlson comorbidity index. Adv Perit Dial 2004;20125- 127
PubMed
Roos  LLSharp  SMCohen  MM Comparing clinical information with claims data: some similarities and differences. J Clin Epidemiol 1991;44 (9) 881- 888
PubMed Link to Article
Roos  LLSharp  SMCohen  MMWajda  A Risk adjustment in claims-based research: the search for efficient approaches. J Clin Epidemiol 1989;42 (12) 1193- 1206
PubMed Link to Article
O'Connor  GTPlume  SKOlmstead  EM  et al. Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group, A regional prospective study of in-hospital mortality associated with coronary artery bypass grafting. JAMA 1991;266 (6) 803- 809
PubMed Link to Article
Deyo  RACherkin  DCCiol  MA Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45 (6) 613- 619
PubMed Link to Article
Charlson  MEPompei  PAles  KLMacKenzie  CR A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40 (5) 373- 383
PubMed Link to Article
Dodd  SBassi  ABodger  KWilliamson  P A comparison of multivariable regression models to analyze cost data. J Eval Clin Pract 2006;12 (1) 76- 86
PubMed Link to Article
Horowitz  AReinhardt  JPBoerner  KTravis  LA The influence of health, social support quality, and rehabilitation on depression among disabled elders. Aging Ment Health 2003;7 (5) 342- 350
PubMed Link to Article
Reinhardt  JP Effects of positive and negative support received and provided on adaptation to chronic physical impairment. Appl Dev Sci 2001;5 (2) 76- 85
Link to Article
Rovner  BWZisselman  PMSchmuely-Dulitzki  Y Depression and disability in older people with impaired vision: a follow-up study. J Am Geriatr Soc 1996;44 (2) 181- 184
PubMed
Zeiss  AMLewinsohn  PMRohde  PSeeley  JR Relationship of physical disease and functional impairment to depression in older people. Psychol Aging 1996;11 (4) 572- 581
PubMed Link to Article
Coleman  ALMorgenstern  H Use of insurance claims databases to evaluate the outcomes of ophthalmic surgery. Surv Ophthalmol 1997;42 (3) 271- 278
PubMed Link to Article
Mitchell  JBBubolz  TPaul  JE  et al.  Using Medicare claims for outcomes research. Med Care 1994;32 (7) ((suppl)) JS38- JS51
PubMed Link to Article

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

1,402 Views
32 Citations
×

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Jobs
JAMAevidence.com

The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
Quick Reference

The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
Quick Reference