Underserved groups could be better considered within population-based eye health surveys: A methodological study.

OBJECTIVE: In pursuit of health equity, the World Health Organization has recently called for more extensive monitoring of inequalities in eye health. Population-based eye health surveys can provide this information, but whether underserved groups are considered in the design, implementation, and reporting of surveys is unknown. We conducted a systematic methodological review of surveys published since 2000 to examine how many population-based eye health surveys have considered underserved groups in their design, reporting, or implementation. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We identified all population-based cross-sectional surveys reporting the prevalence of objectively measured vision impairment or blindness. Using the PROGRESS+ framework to identify underserved groups, we assessed whether each study considered underserved groups within 15 items across the rationale, sampling or recruitment methods, or the reporting of participation and prevalence rates. RESULTS: 388 eye health surveys were included in this review. Few studies prospectively considered underserved groups during study planning or implementation, for example within their sample size calculations (n=5, ∼1%) or recruitment strategies (n=70, 18%). The most common way that studies considered underserved groups was in the reporting of prevalence estimates (n=374, 96%). We observed a modest increase in the number of distinct PROGRESS+ factors considered by a publication over the study period. Gender/sex was considered within at least one item by 95% (n=267) of studies. Forty-three percent (n=166) of included studies were conducted primarily on underserved population groups, particularly for sub-national studies of people living in rural areas, and we identified examples of robust population-based studies in socially excluded groups. CONCLUSION: More effort is needed to improve the design, implementation, and reporting of surveys to monitor inequality and promote equity in eye health. Ideally, national-level monitoring of vision impairment and service coverage would be supplemented with smaller-scale studies to understand the disparities experienced by the most underserved groups.

Strategies to address inequity of uncorrected refractive error in the Western Pacific: A modified Delphi process.

PURPOSE: Uncorrected refractive error is the leading cause of vision impairment globally; however, little attention has been given to equity and access to services. This study aimed to identify and prioritise: (1) strategies to address inequity of access to refractive error services and (2) population groups to target with these strategies in five sub-regions within the Western Pacific. METHODS: We invited eye care professionals to complete a two-round online prioritisation process. In round 1, panellists nominated population groups least able to access refractive error services, and strategies to improve access. Responses were summarised and presented in round 2, where panellists ranked the groups (by extent of difficulty and size) and strategies (in terms of reach, acceptability, sustainability, feasibility and equity). Groups and strategies were scored according to their rank within each sub-region. RESULTS: Seventy five people from 17 countries completed both rounds (55% women). Regional differences were evident. Indigenous peoples were a priority group for improving access in Australasia and Southeast Asia, while East Asia identified refugees and Oceania identified rural/remote people. Across the five sub-regions, reducing out-of-pocket costs was a commonly prioritised strategy for refraction and spectacles. Australasia prioritised improving cultural safety, East Asia prioritised strengthening school eye health programmes and Oceania and Southeast Asia prioritised outreach to rural areas. CONCLUSION: These results provide policy-makers, researchers and funders with a starting point for context-specific actions to improve access to refractive error services, particularly among underserved population groups who may be left behind in existing private sector-dominated models of care.

The Rapid Assessment of Avoidable Blindness survey: Review of the methodology and protocol for the seventh version (RAAB7).

The Rapid Assessment of Avoidable Blindness (RAAB) is a population-based cross-sectional survey methodology used to collect data on the prevalence of vision impairment and its causes and eye care service indicators among the population 50 years and older. RAAB has been used for over 20 years with modifications to the protocol over time reflected in changing version numbers; this paper describes the latest version of the methodology-RAAB7. RAAB7 is a collaborative project between the International Centre for Eye Health and Peek Vision with guidance from a steering group of global eye health stakeholders. We have fully digitised RAAB, allowing for fast, accurate and secure data collection. A bespoke Android mobile application automatically synchronises data to a secure Amazon Web Services virtual private cloud when devices are online so users can monitor data collection in real-time. Vision is screened using Peek Vision's digital visual acuity test for mobile devices and uncorrected, corrected and pinhole visual acuity are collected. An optional module on Disability is available. We have rebuilt the RAAB data repository as the end point of RAAB7's digital data workflow, including a front-end website to access the past 20 years of RAAB surveys worldwide. This website ( https://www.raab.world) hosts open access RAAB data to support the advocacy and research efforts of the global eye health community. Active research sub-projects are finalising three new components in 2024-2025: 1) Near vision screening to address data gaps on near vision impairment and effective refractive error coverage; 2) an optional Health Economics module to assess the affordability of eye care services and productivity losses associated with vision impairment; 3) an optional Health Systems data collection module to support RAAB's primary aim to inform eye health service planning by supporting users to integrate eye care facility data with population data.

In 2020 there were an estimated 1.1 billion people with vision impairment globally. Vision impairment negatively affects people's quality of life, social inclusion and productivity. The Rapid Assessment of Avoidable Blindness (RAAB) survey tool collects information about the vision and eye health of people aged 50 years and older in a defined population. It has been used worldwide for over 20 years to inform eye health service planning. This paper outlines the current survey methodology and summarises recent and upcoming developments. The RAAB project team has updated the survey to allow users to measure vision and collect other information on mobile devices (telephones or tablets) and send the findings directly to a central computer for automated analysis. The project team has built a new website to store this information and to allow anyone interested to find out more about the surveys done to date. The RAAB project continues to develop new features to make the information collected in surveys more useful for eye health service planning and eye health advocacy.

How have services for diabetes, eye, hearing and foot health been integrated for adults? Protocol for a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: The global population is ageing, and by 2050, there will be almost 2.1 billion people over the age of 60 years. This ageing population means conditions such as diabetes are on the increase, as well as other conditions associated with ageing (and/or diabetes), including those that cause vision impairment, hearing impairment or foot problems. The aim of this scoping review is to identify the extent of the literature describing integration of services for adults of two or more of diabetes, eye, hearing or foot services. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The main database searches are of Medline and Embase, conducted by an information specialist, without language restrictions, for studies published from 1 January 2000 describing the integration of services for two or more of diabetes, eye, hearing and foot health in the private or public sector and at the primary or secondary level of care, primarily targeted to adults aged ≥40 years. A grey literature search will focus on websites of key organisations. Reference lists of all included articles will be reviewed to identify further studies. Screening and data extraction will be undertaken by two reviewers independently and any discrepancies will be resolved by discussion. We will use tables, maps and text to summarise the included studies and findings, including where studies were undertaken, which services tended to be integrated, in which sector and level of the health system, targeting which population groups and whether they were considered effective. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As our review will be based on published data, ethical approval will not be sought. This review is part of a project in Aotearoa New Zealand that aims to improve access to services for adults with diabetes or eye, hearing or foot conditions. The findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences.

Reporting of equity in observational epidemiology: A methodological review.

Background: Observational studies can inform how we understand and address persisting health inequities through the collection, reporting and analysis of health equity factors. However, the extent to which the analysis and reporting of equity-relevant aspects in observational research are generally unknown. Thus, we aimed to systematically evaluate how equity-relevant observational studies reported equity considerations in the study design and analyses. Methods: We searched MEDLINE for health equity-relevant observational studies from January 2020 to March 2022, resulting in 16 828 articles. We randomly selected 320 studies, ensuring a balance in focus on populations experiencing inequities, country income settings, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) topic. We extracted information on study design and analysis methods. Results: The bulk of the studies were conducted in North America (n = 95, 30%), followed by Europe and Central Asia (n = 55, 17%). Half of the studies (n = 171, 53%) addressed general health and well-being, while 49 (15%) focused on mental health conditions. Two-thirds of the studies (n = 220, 69%) were cross-sectional. Eight (3%) engaged with populations experiencing inequities, while 22 (29%) adapted recruitment methods to reach these populations. Further, 67 studies (21%) examined interaction effects primarily related to race or ethnicity (48%). Two-thirds of the studies (72%) adjusted for characteristics associated with inequities, and 18 studies (6%) used flow diagrams to depict how populations experiencing inequities progressed throughout the studies. Conclusions: Despite over 80% of the equity-focused observational studies providing a rationale for a focus on health equity, reporting of study design features relevant to health equity ranged from 0-95%, with over half of the items reported by less than one-quarter of studies. This methodological study is a baseline assessment to inform the development of an equity-focussed reporting guideline for observational studies as an extension of the well-known Strengthening Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guideline.

Use of the CONSIDER statement by eye health researchers when conducting and reporting research involving Indigenous peoples: an online survey.

BACKGROUND: Indigenous peoples experience worse eye health compared to non-Indigenous peoples. Service providers and researchers must avoid perpetuating this inequity. To help achieve this, researchers can use the CONSolIDated critERia for strengthening the reporting of health research involving Indigenous peoples (CONSIDER) statement. This study aimed to identify the degree to which the CONSIDER statement has been used by eye health researchers when conducting and reporting research with an Indigenous component, and how they perceive its relevance in their future research. METHODS: We used purposive sampling to recruit eye health researchers from any country who have undertaken research with an Indigenous component. The online survey collected quantitative and qualitative data and was analysed using descriptive statistics and reflexive thematic analysis. Responses were gathered on a four-point Likert scale (1 to 4), with four being the most positive statement. RESULTS: Thirty-nine eye health researchers from nine countries completed the survey (Aotearoa New Zealand, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Guatemala, Panama, Peru); almost two-thirds (n = 24) undertake epidemiological research. On average, participants disclosed only 'sometimes' previously reporting CONSIDER items (2.26 ± 1.14), but they thought the items were relevant to eye health research and were motivated to use these guidelines in their future research. Some participants requested clarity about how CONSIDER aligned with existing guidelines, and when and how to apply the statement. Others shared rich experiences of the benefits to their research of Indigenous leadership and collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: The CONSIDER statement is perceived as a valuable tool by these eye health researchers, and there are opportunities to maximise uptake and use, including increasing awareness of the statement, clarity about when it applies, and availability of institutional-level support.

What is the coverage of retina screening services for people with diabetes? Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Diabetic retinopathy is a leading cause of vision impairment globally. Vision loss from diabetic retinopathy can generally be prevented by early detection and timely treatment. The WHO included a measure of service access for diabetic retinopathy as a core indicator in the Eye Care Indicator Menu launched in 2022: retina screening coverage for people with diabetes. The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive global and regional summary of the available information on retina screening coverage for people with diabetes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A search will be conducted in five databases without language restrictions for studies from any country reporting retina screening coverage for adults with any type of diabetes at the national or subnational level using data collected since 1 January 2000 until the search date. We will also seek reports and coverage statistics from government websites of all WHO member states. Two investigators will independently screen studies, extract relevant data and assess risk of bias of included studies. The results of the review will be reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guideline. We will summarise the range of coverage definitions reported across included studies and present the median retina screening coverage in WHO regions and by World Bank country income level. Depending on the availability of data, we will conduct meta-analysis to assess disparities in retina screening coverage for people with diabetes by factors in the PROGRESS framework (Place of residence, Race/ethnicity/culture/language, Occupation, Gender/sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status and Social capital). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review will only include published data thus no ethical approval will be sought. The findings of this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: OSF registration 17/10/2023: https://osf.io/k5p69.

Access to eye care among adults from an underserved community in Aotearoa New Zealand.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In all countries, there are population groups that are underserved by eye health services. By exploring access to eye care for these communities, optometrists and other eye care providers can promote equitable access to quality eye care, including strengthening patient relationships, and championing inclusive, people-centred services. BACKGROUND: New Zealand has very few policies to enable access to primary eye health services. The aim of this study was to explore the barriers and facilitators to accessing eye health services among adults from an underserved community in Auckland. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted using in-depth interviews, drawing on the domains of a widely accepted patient-centred framework for health care access. Twenty-five adults with vision impairment were recruited from a community-based eye clinic in a suburb with high area-level deprivation. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, coded, and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-five participants were interviewed, aged between 47 and 71 years, of whom 13 were female. The participants included 13 Pacific people, 6 Maori, 4 New Zealand Europeans and 2 people of other ethnicities. Thematic analysis revealed five themes describing accessing eye care from a community perspective. Two major themes related to barriers were identified, financial barriers and barriers due to location of services and transport. The facilitators of access were, the ability of individuals to identify available eye health services, the provision of appropriate eye health services, and the crucial role played by whanau (family) in supporting participants to seek eye health services. CONCLUSION: Cost is a major barrier to accessing eye health services in New Zealand. The barriers and facilitators expressed by this underserved community can inform efforts to improve eye health access in New Zealand through people-centred service designs.

Travel time to cataract surgical services in Kenya, Malawi and Rwanda: demonstrating a standardised indicator of physical access to cataract surgery.

BACKGROUND: Travel time can be used to assess health services accessibility by reflecting the proximity of services to the people they serve. We aimed to demonstrate an indicator of physical access to cataract surgery and identify subnational locations where people were more at risk of not accessing cataract surgery. METHODS: We used an open-access inventory of public health facilities plus key informants in Kenya, Malawi and Rwanda to compile a geocoded inventory of cataract facilities. For each country, gridded estimates of the population aged ≥ 50 years and a travel-time friction surface were combined and a least-cost-path algorithm applied to estimate the shortest travel time between each grid and the nearest cataract facility. We categorised continuous travel time by 1-, 2- and 3 h thresholds and calculated the proportion of the population in each category. RESULTS: At the national level, the proportion of the population aged ≥ 50 years within 2 h travel time to permanent cataract surgical services was 97.2% in Rwanda (n = 10 facilities), 93.5% in Kenya (n = 74 facilities) and 92.0% in Malawi (n = 6 facilities); this reduced to 77.5%, 84.1% and 52.4% within 1 h, respectively. The least densely populated subnational regions had the poorest access to cataract facilities in Malawi (0.0%) and Kenya (1.9%). CONCLUSION: We demonstrated an indicator of access that reflects the distribution of the population at risk of age-related cataract and identifies regions that could benefit from more accessible services. This indicator provides additional demand-side context for eye health planning and supports WHO's goal of advancing integrated people-centred eye care.

Clinical indicators for diabetic eyecare delivered by optometrists in Australia: a Delphi study.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Valid and updated clinical indicators can serve as important tools in assessing and improving eyecare delivery. BACKGROUND: Indicators for diabetic eyecare in Australia were previously developed from guidelines published before 2013 and then used to assess the appropriateness of care delivery through a nationwide patient record card audit (the iCareTrack study). To reflect emerging evidence and contemporary practice, this study aimed to update clinical indicators for optometric care for people with type 2 diabetes in Australia. METHODS: Forty-five candidate indicators, including existing iCareTrack and new indicators derived from nine high-quality evidence-based guidelines, were generated. A two-round modified Delphi process where expert panel members rated the impact, acceptability, and feasibility of the indicators on a 9-point scale and voted for inclusion or exclusion of the candidate indicators was used. Consensus on inclusion was reached when the median scores for impact, acceptability, and feasibility were ≥7 and >75% of experts voted for inclusion. RESULTS: Thirty-two clinical indicators with high acceptability, impact and feasibility ratings (all median scores: 9) were developed. The final indicators were related to history taking (n = 12), physical examination (n = 8), recall period (n = 5), referral (n = 5), and patient education/communication (n = 2). Most (14 of 15) iCareTrack indicators were retained either in the original format or with modifications. New indicators included documenting the type of diabetes, serum lipid level, pregnancy, systemic medications, nephropathy, Indigenous status, general practitioner details, pupil examination, intraocular pressure, optical coherence tomography, diabetic retinopathy grading, recall period for high-risk diabetic patients without retinopathy, referral of high-risk proliferative retinopathy, communication with the general practitioner, and patient education. CONCLUSION: A set of 32 updated diabetic eyecare clinical indicators was developed based on contemporary evidence and expert consensus. These updated indicators inform the development of programs to assess and enhance the eyecare delivery for people with diabetes in Australia.

Associations between vision impairment and vision-related interventions on crash risk and driving cessation: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically investigate the associations between vision impairment and risk of motor vehicle crash (MVC) involvement, and evaluate vision-related interventions to reduce MVCs. DESIGN: Medline (Ovid), EMBASE and Global Health electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to March 2022 for observational and interventional English-language studies. Screening, data extraction and appraisals using the Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tools were completed by two reviewers independently. Where appropriate, measures of association were converted into risk ratios (RRs) or ORs for meta-analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Drivers of four-wheeled vehicles of all ages with no cognitive declines. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: MVC involvement (primary) and driving cessation (secondary). RESULTS: 101 studies (n=778 052) were included after full-text review. 57 studies only involved older drivers (≥65 years) and 85 were in high-income settings. Heterogeneity in the data meant that most meta-analyses were underpowered as only 25 studies, further split into different groups of eye diseases and measures of vision, could be meta-analysed. The limited evidence from the meta-analyses suggests that visual field defects (four studies; RR 1.51 (95% CI 1.23, 1.85); p<0.001; I2=46.79%), and contrast sensitivity (two studies; RR 1.40 (95% CI 1.08, 1.80); p=0.01, I2=0.11%) and visual acuity loss (five studies; RR 1.21 (95% CI 1.02, 1.43); p=0.03, I2=28.49%) may increase crash risk. The results are more inconclusive for available evidence for associations of glaucoma (five studies, RR 1.27 (95% CI 0.67, 2.42); p=0.47; I2=93.48%) and cataract (two studies RR 1.15 (95% CI 0.97, 1.36); p=0.11; I2=3.96%) with crashes. Driving cessation may also be linked with glaucoma (two studies; RR 1.62 (95% CI 1.20, 2.19); p<0.001, I2=22.45%), age-related macular degeneration (AMD) (three studies; RR 2.21 (95% CI 1.47, 3.31); p<0.001, I2=75.11%) and reduced contrast sensitivity (three studies; RR 1.30 (95% CI 1.05, 1.61); p=0.02; I2=63.19%). Cataract surgery halved MVC risk (three studies; RR 0.55 (95% CI 0.34, 0.92); p=0.02; I2=97.10). Ranibizumab injections (four randomised controlled trials) prolonged driving in persons with AMD. CONCLUSION: Impaired vision identified through a variety of measures is associated with both increased MVC involvement and cessation. Cataract surgery can reduce MVC risk. Despite literature being highly heterogeneous, this review shows that detection of vision problems and appropriate treatment are critical to road safety. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020172153.

Primary eye health services for older adults as a component of universal health coverage: a scoping review of evidence from high income countries.

In pursuit of Universal Health Coverage (UHC) for eye health, countries must strengthen services for older adults, who experience the highest prevalence of eye conditions. This scoping review narratively summarised (i) primary eye health services for older adults in eleven high-income countries/territories (from government websites), and (ii) the evidence that eye health services reduced vision impairment and/or provided UHC (access, quality, equity, or financial protection) (from a systematic literature search). We identified 76 services, commonly comprehensive eye examinations ± refractive error correction. Of 102 included publications reporting UHC outcomes, there was no evidence to support vision screening in the absence of follow-up care. Included studies tended to report the UHC dimensions of access (n=70), equity (n=47), and/or quality (n=39), and rarely reported financial protection (n=5). Insufficient access for population subgroups was common; several examples of horizontal and vertical integration of eye health services within the health system were described. Funding: This work was funded by Blind Low Vision New Zealand for Eye Health Aotearoa.

Rapid methods for identifying barriers and solutions to improve access to community health services: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The advancement of universal health coverage (UHC) is largely based on identifying and addressing barriers to accessing community health services. Traditional qualitative research approaches provide excellent insights but have unfeasibly high resource requirements for most care providers. AIM: To identify, categorise, and evaluate methods that have been used to identify barriers to and/or solutions for improving access to community-based health services, grounded in engagement with affected communities, excluding approaches that take >14 days. DESIGN & SETTING: This was a scoping review. METHOD: Following Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines, a search was undertaken using the Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Global Health, and Google Scholar. An information specialist designed the search, and dual independent review and data charting were used. RESULTS: In total, 44 studies were included from 30 countries, reporting on 18 different clinical services. Thirty studies used self-described 'rapid' approaches; however, the majority of these did not justify what they meant by this term. Nearly half of the studies used mixed- or multi-methods and triangulation to verify early findings. All of the qualitative studies used interviews and/or focus groups, which were often supplemented with observations, document review, and mapping activities. The use of in situ snowball and convenience sampling; community members as data collectors and cultural guides; collaborative summarisation (review of findings with community members and end-users); and deductive framework analysis expedited the research processes. There were no data on costs. CONCLUSION: There are a wide range of methods that can be used to deliver timely information about barriers to access. The methods employed in the articles reviewed tended to use traditional data collection approaches in innovative ways.

A scoping review establishes need for consensus guidance on reporting health equity in observational studies.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the support from the available guidance on reporting of health equity in research for our candidate items and to identify additional items for the Strengthening Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology-Equity extension. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a scoping review by searching Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Methodology Register, LILACS, and Caribbean Center on Health Sciences Information up to January 2022. We also searched reference lists and gray literature for additional resources. We included guidance and assessments (hereafter termed "resources") related to conduct and/or reporting for any type of health research with or about people experiencing health inequity. RESULTS: We included 34 resources, which supported one or more candidate items or contributed to new items about health equity reporting in observational research. Each candidate item was supported by a median of six (range: 1-15) resources. In addition, 12 resources suggested 13 new items, such as "report the background of investigators". CONCLUSION: Existing resources for reporting health equity in observational studies aligned with our interim checklist of candidate items. We also identified additional items that will be considered in the development of a consensus-based and evidence-based guideline for reporting health equity in observational studies.

Improvement studies for equitable and evidence-based innovation: an overview of the 'IM-SEEN' model.

BACKGROUND: Health inequalities are ubiquitous, and as countries seek to expand service coverage, they are at risk of exacerbating existing inequalities unless they adopt equity-focused approaches to service delivery. MAIN TEXT: Our team has developed an equity-focused continuous improvement model that reconciles prioritisation of disadvantaged groups with the expansion of service coverage. Our new approach is based on the foundations of routinely collecting sociodemographic data; identifying left-behind groups; engaging with these service users to elicit barriers and potential solutions; and then rigorously testing these solutions with pragmatic, embedded trials. This paper presents the rationale for the model, a holistic overview of how the different elements fit together, and potential applications. Future work will present findings as the model is operationalised in eye-health programmes in Botswana, India, Kenya, and Nepal. CONCLUSION: There is a real paucity of approaches for operationalising equity. By bringing a series of steps together that force programme managers to focus on groups that are being left behind, we present a model that can be used in any service delivery setting to build equity into routine practice.

Use of public sector diabetes eye services in New Zealand 2006-2019: Analysis of national routinely collected datasets.

OBJECTIVE: To assess diabetes eye service use in New Zealand among people aged ≥15 years by estimating service attendance, biennial screening rate, and disparities in the use of screening and treatment services. METHODS: We obtained Ministry of Health data from the National Non-Admitted Patient Collection on diabetes eye service events between 1 July 2006 and 31 December 2019 and sociodemographic and mortality data from the Virtual Diabetes Register and linked these using a unique patient identifier (encrypted National Health Index). We 1) summarized attendance at retinal screening and ophthalmology services, 2) calculated biennial and triennial screening rate, 3) summarized treatment with laser and anti-VEGF and used log-binomial regression to examine associations of all of these with age group, ethnicity, and area-level deprivation. RESULTS: In total, 245,844 people aged ≥15 years had at least one diabetes eye service appointment attended or scheduled; half of these (n = 125,821, 51.2%) attended only retinal screening, one-sixth attended only ophthalmology (n = 35,883, 14.6%) and one-third attended both (n = 78,300, 31.8%). The biennial retinal screening rate was 62.1%, with large regional variation (73.9% in Southern District to 29.2% in West Coast). Compared with NZ Europeans, Maori were approximately twice as likely to never receive diabetes eye care or to access ophthalmology when referred from retinal screening, 9% relatively less likely to receive biennial screening and received the fewest anti-VEGF injections when treatment was commenced. Disparities in service access were also present for Pacific Peoples compared to NZ Europeans, younger and older age groups compared to those aged 50-59 years and those living in areas with higher deprivation. CONCLUSIONS: Access to diabetes eye care is suboptimal, with substantial disparity between age groups, ethnicity groups, area level deprivation quintile and across districts. Efforts to improve access to and quality of diabetes eye care services must include strengthening data collection and monitoring.

Prevalence and impact of combined vision and hearing (dual sensory) impairment: A scoping review.

Hearing and vision impairments are common globally. They are often considered separately in research, and in planning and delivering services. However, they can occur concurrently, termed dual sensory impairment (DSI). The prevalence and impact of hearing and vision impairment have been well-examined, but there has been much less consideration of DSI. The aim of this scoping review was to determine the nature and extent of the evidence on prevalence and impact of DSI. Three databases were searched: MEDLINE, Embase and Global Health (April 2022). We included primary studies and systematic reviews reporting the prevalence or impact of DSI. No limits were placed on age, publication dates, or country. Only studies where the full text was available in English were included. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstract, full texts. Data were charted by two reviewers independently using a pre-piloted form. The review identified 183 reports of 153 unique primary studies and 14 review articles. Most evidence came from high-income countries (86% of reports). Prevalence varied across reports, as did age groups of participants and definitions used. The prevalence of DSI increased with age. Impact was examined across three broad groups of outcomes-psychosocial, participation, and physical health. There was a strong trend towards poorer outcomes for people with DSI across all categories compared to people with one or neither impairment, including activities of daily living (worse for people with DSI in 78% of reports) and depression (68%). This scoping review highlights that DSI is a relatively common condition with substantial impact, particularly among older adults. There is a gap in evidence from low and middle-income countries. There is a pressing need for a consensus position on the definition(s) of DSI and standardisation of reporting age groups to enable reliable estimates to be ascertained and compared and responsive services developed.

Socioeconomic position and eye health outcomes: identifying inequality in rapid population-based surveys.

OBJECTIVE: Monitoring health outcomes disaggregated by socioeconomic position (SEP) is crucial to ensure no one is left behind in efforts to achieve universal health coverage. In eye health planning, rapid population surveys are most commonly implemented; these need an SEP measure that is feasible to collect within the constraints of a streamlined examination protocol. We aimed to assess whether each of four SEP measures identified inequality-an underserved group or socioeconomic gradient-in key eye health outcomes. DESIGN: Population-based cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: A subset of 4020 adults 50 years and older from a nationally representative sample of 9188 adults aged 35 years and older in The Gambia. OUTCOME MEASURES: Blindness (presenting visual acuity (PVA) <3/60), any vision impairment (VI) (PVA <6/12), cataract surgical coverage (CSC) and effective cataract surgical coverage (eCSC) at two operable cataract thresholds (<6/12 and <6/60) analysed by one objective asset-based measure (EquityTool) and three subjective measures of relative SEP (a self-reported economic ladder question and self-reported household food adequacy and income sufficiency). RESULTS: Subjective household food adequacy and income sufficiency demonstrated a socioeconomic gradient (queuing pattern) in point estimates of any VI and CSC and eCSC at both operable cataract thresholds. Any VI, CSC <6/60 and eCSC <6/60 were worse among people who reported inadequate household food compared with those with just adequate food. Any VI and CSC <6/60 were worse among people who reported not enough household income compared with those with just enough income. Neither the subjective economic ladder question nor the objective asset-wealth measure demonstrated any socioeconomic gradient or pattern of inequality in any of the eye health outcomes. CONCLUSION: We recommend pilot-testing self-reported food adequacy and income sufficiency as SEP variables in vision and eye health surveys in other locations, including assessing the acceptability, reliability and repeatability of each question.

Improving social justice in observational studies: protocol for the development of a global and Indigenous STROBE-equity reporting guideline.

BACKGROUND: Addressing persistent and pervasive health inequities is a global moral imperative, which has been highlighted and magnified by the societal and health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Observational studies can aid our understanding of the impact of health and structural oppression based on the intersection of gender, race, ethnicity, age and other factors, as they frequently collect this data. However, the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guideline, does not provide guidance related to reporting of health equity. The goal of this project is to develop a STROBE-Equity reporting guideline extension. METHODS: We assembled a diverse team across multiple domains, including gender, age, ethnicity, Indigenous background, disciplines, geographies, lived experience of health inequity and decision-making organizations. Using an inclusive, integrated knowledge translation approach, we will implement a five-phase plan which will include: (1) assessing the reporting of health equity in published observational studies, (2) seeking wide international feedback on items to improve reporting of health equity, (3) establishing consensus amongst knowledge users and researchers, (4) evaluating in partnership with Indigenous contributors the relevance to Indigenous peoples who have globally experienced the oppressive legacy of colonization, and (5) widely disseminating and seeking endorsement from relevant knowledge users. We will seek input from external collaborators using social media, mailing lists and other communication channels. DISCUSSION: Achieving global imperatives such as the Sustainable Development Goals (e.g., SDG 10 Reduced inequalities, SDG 3 Good health and wellbeing) requires advancing health equity in research. The implementation of the STROBE-Equity guidelines will enable a better awareness and understanding of health inequities through better reporting. We will broadly disseminate the reporting guideline with tools to enable adoption and use by journal editors, authors, and funding agencies, using diverse strategies tailored to specific audiences.

Cataract services for all: Strategies for equitable access from a global modified Delphi process.

Vision loss from cataract is unequally distributed, and there is very little evidence on how to overcome this inequity. This project aimed to engage multiple stakeholder groups to identify and prioritise (1) delivery strategies that improve access to cataract services for under-served groups and (2) population groups to target with these strategies across world regions. We recruited panellists knowledgeable about cataract services from eight world regions to complete a two-round online modified Delphi process. In Round 1, panellists answered open-ended questions about strategies to improve access to screening and surgery for cataract, and which population groups to target with these strategies. In Round 2, panellists ranked the strategies and groups to arrive at the final lists regionally and globally. 183 people completed both rounds (46% women). In total, 22 distinct population groups were identified. At the global level the priority groups for improving access to cataract services were people in rural/remote areas, with low socioeconomic status and low social support. South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa were the only regions in which panellists ranked women in the top 5 priority groups. Panellists identified 16 and 19 discreet strategies to improve access to screening and surgical services, respectively. These mostly addressed health system/supply side factors, including policy, human resources, financing and service delivery. We believe these results can serve eye health decision-makers, researchers and funders as a starting point for coordinated action to improve access to cataract services, particularly among population groups who have historically been left behind.