{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029985007496251874, 'fraction_numerical': 0.017991004497751123, 'mean_word_length': 4.933333333333334, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cost-effectiveness of the AMOArray multifocal intraocular lens in cataract surgery.

PURPOSE
To compare the cost and outcomes of bilateral cataract surgery with the foldable AMOArray multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL) versus the foldable monofocal intraocular lens from the health care payer perspective.


METHODS
A cost-effectiveness analysis was used to evaluate treatment with the MIOL compared to monofocal lens, using data from clinical trials, literature, expert opinion, and a review of the German health care funding and reimbursement system.


RESULTS
The average total direct medical cost per patient (per procedure) with the MIOL was DM 1,774 compared to DM 1,716 with the monofocal lens (1DM = US$0.558 in April 1998). The MIOL was more cost-effective than the monofocal lens in terms of cost per patient (spectacle-free). Cost per patient without overall limitation in vision-related function and cost per patient without limited night vision were similar for both patient groups. The incremental cost of the MIOL for a one-point increase was DM 52 in the self-rated score "quality of vision," DM 82 in "satisfaction with day vision," and DM 115 in "satisfaction with night vision."


CONCLUSION
The small additional cost of the MIOL was outweighed by the increased satisfaction with vision experienced by MIOL patients.