Contact lens education for the practitioners of the future.

The World Health Organization has identified a shortage of trained human resources as one of the greatest challenges to increasing the availability of eye care services and reducing preventable visual impairment around the world. Increased prevalence of myopia and new strategies for myopia management have raised the prospect of various interventions, including contact lenses for therapeutic use as well as for refractive correction. More personnel skilled in contact lens fitting will be needed to address potential worldwide demand for these interventions. This review investigates the current status and future requirements of global contact lens education in light of these developments. The COVD-19 pandemic led educational institutions worldwide to move towards online delivery. An online survey among 546 educators, conducted in May 2020, investigated changes to contact lens education delivery before and after the onset of the pandemic. A total of 214 responses were received from 32 countries. Prior to COVID-19 restrictions, 23% of educators had conducted more than 50% of their total teaching online; however, 69% expected to conduct more than half of their teaching online by the end of 2020 and 12% anticipated 90% or more of their teaching would be online. Some 76% of educators expected to provide more online lectures after the pandemic and 63% anticipated new methods to deliver practical education. Around half were planning to introduce new teaching online platforms (54%) and more online assessment methods (53%). The global need for increasing numbers of skilled personnel points to a crucial role for educators in teaching the contact lens practitioners of the future. Contact lens education delivery was already evolving prior to COVID-19, and changes that are currently occurring may lead to permanent differences in the way contact lenses are taught in future. The International Association of Contact Lens Educators (IACLE) provides educators with a standardised global curriculum, online resources and teaching technology that could also serve as a model for wider ophthalmic education in future.

Could telehealth help eye care practitioners adapt contact lens services during the COVID-19 pandemic?

The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated government-imposed restrictions on social interactions and travel. For many, the guidance has led to new ways of working, most notably a shift towards working remotely. While eye care practitioners (ECPs) may continue to provide urgent or emergency eye care, in many cases the travel restrictions present a unique challenge by preventing conventional face-to-face examination. Telephone triage provides a useful starting point for establishing at-risk and emergency patients; but patient examination is central to contact lens patient care. The indeterminate period over which conventional practice will be suspended, and the risk that resumption of 'normal' practice could be impeded by a potential secondary peak in COVID-19 cases, hastens the need for practitioners to adapt their delivery of eyecare. Specifically, it is prudent to reflect upon supportive evidence for more comprehensive approaches to teleoptometry in contact lens practice. Smartphone based ocular imaging is an area which has seen considerable growth, particularly for imaging the posterior eye. Smartphone imaging of the anterior eye requires additional specialised instrumentation unlikely to be available to patients at home. Further, there is only limited evidence for self-administered image capture. In general, digital photographs, are useful for detection of gross anterior eye changes, but subtle changes are less discernible. For the assessment of visual acuity, many electronic test charts have been validated for use by practitioners. Research into self-administered visual acuity measures remains limited. The absence of a comprehensive evidence base for teleoptometry limits ECPs, particularly during this pandemic. Knowledge gaps ought to be addressed to facilitate development of optometry specific evidence-based guidance for telecare. In particular, advances in ocular self-imaging could help move this field forwards.

Private Equity in Ophthalmology and Optometry: Analysis of Acquisitions from 2012 through 2019 in the United States.

PURPOSE: To identify temporal and geographic trends in private equity (PE)-backed acquisitions of ophthalmology and optometry practices in the United States. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study using private equity acquisition and investment data from January 1, 2012, through October 20, 2019. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 228 PE acquisitions of ophthalmology and optometry practices in the United States between 2012 and 2019. METHODS: Acquisition and financial investment data were compiled from 6 financial databases, 4 industry news outlets, and publicly available press releases from PE firms or platform companies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Yearly trends in ophthalmology and optometry acquisitions, including number of total acquisitions, clinical locations, and providers of acquired practices as well as subsequent sales, median holding period, geographic footprint, and financing status of each platform company. RESULTS: A total of 228 practices associated with 1466 clinical locations and 2146 ophthalmologists or optometrists were acquired by 29 PE-backed platform companies. Of these acquisitions, 127, 9, and 92 were comprehensive or multispecialty, retina, and optometry practices, respectively. Acquisitions increased rapidly between 2012 and 2019: 42 practices were acquired between 2012 and 2016 compared to 186 from 2017 through 2019. Financing rounds of platform companies paralleled temporal acquisition trends. Three platform companies, comprising 60% of platforms formed before 2016, were subsequently sold or recapitalized to new PE investors by the end of this study period with a median holding period of 3.5 years. In terms of geographic distribution, acquisitions occurred in 40 states with most PE firms developing multistate platform companies. New York and California were the 2 states with the greatest number of PE acquisitions with 22 and 19, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Private equity-backed acquisitions of ophthalmology and optometry practices have increased rapidly since 2012, with some platform companies having already been sold or recapitalized to new investors. Additionally, private equity-backed platform companies have developed both regionally focused and multistate models of add-on acquisitions. Future research should assess the impact of PE investment on patient, provider, and practice metrics, including health outcomes, expenditures, procedural volume, and staff employment.

Changes in Electronic Health Record Use Time and Documentation over the Course of a Decade.

PURPOSE: With the current wide adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) by ophthalmologists, there are widespread concerns about the amount of time spent using the EHR. The goal of this study was to examine how the amount of time spent using EHRs as well as related documentation behaviors changed 1 decade after EHR adoption. DESIGN: Single-center cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Six hundred eighty-five thousand three hundred sixty-one office visits with 70 ophthalmology providers. METHODS: We calculated time spent using the EHR associated with each individual office visit using EHR audit logs and determined chart closure times and progress note length from secondary EHR data. We tracked and modeled how these metrics changed from 2006 to 2016 with linear mixed models. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Minutes spent using the EHR associated with an office visit, chart closure time in hours from the office visit check-in time, and progress note length in characters. RESULTS: Median EHR time per office visit in 2006 was 4.2 minutes (interquartile range [IQR], 3.5 minutes), and increased to 6.4 minutes (IQR, 4.5 minutes) in 2016. Median chart closure time was 2.8 hours (IQR, 21.3 hours) in 2006 and decreased to 2.3 hours (IQR, 18.5 hours) in 2016. In 2006, median note length was 1530 characters (IQR, 1435 characters) and increased to 3838 characters (IQR, 2668.3 characters) in 2016. Linear mixed models found EHR time per office visit was 31.9±0.2% (P < 0.001) greater from 2014 through 2016 than from 2006 through 2010, chart closure time was 6.7±0.3 hours (P < 0.001) shorter from 2014 through 2016 versus 2006 through 2010, and note length was 1807.4±6.5 characters (P < 0.001) longer from 2014 through 2016 versus 2006 through 2010. CONCLUSIONS: After 1 decade of use, providers spend more time using the EHR for an office visit, generate longer notes, and close the chart faster. These changes are likely to represent increased time and documentation pressure for providers. Electronic health record redesign and new documentation regulations may help to address these issues.

Trends of contact lens prescribing in Jordan.

PURPOSE: To evaluate contact lens prescribing trends among optometrists in Jordan. METHODS: Optometrists from 173 practices in Jordan were surveyed about prescribing contact lenses in their practice. Practitioners were required to record information for the last 10 patients that visited their practice. Demographic data such as age and gender was obtained for each patient. In addition, data relating to lens type, lens design, replacement methods and the care regime advised to each patient were recorded. Practitioners were required to provide information relating to their education and years of experience. The influence of education and experience with respect to lens prescribing trends was explored using linear regression models for the proportions of lens types fitted for patients. RESULTS: A total of 1730 contact lens fits were analyzed. The mean (±SD) age of lens wearers was 26.6 (±7.9) years, of whom 65% were female. Conventional hydrogel lenses were the most prescribed lenses, accounting for 60.3% of the fits, followed by silicone hydrogel lenses (31.3%), and rigid lenses (8.4%). In terms of lens design, spherical lenses appeared to be most commonly prescribed on monthly basis. Daily disposable lenses were second most prescribed lens modality, accounting for 20.4% of the study sample. Multi-purpose solution (MPS) was the preferred care regimen, with a prevalence of 88.1% reported in the study sample, compared to hydrogen peroxide (1-step and 2-step), which represented only 2.8% of the patients in this study. A relationship was established between the two educational groups for rigid lens prescribing (F=17.4, p<0.0001), while the experience of the optometrist was not a significant factor (F=0.4, p=0.54). CONCLUSION: This work has provides an up-to-date analysis of contact lens prescribing trends among optometrists in Jordan. Contact lens prescribing in terms of lens type, lens design, modality of wear and care regimen agree with global market trends with small variations. This report will help practitioners and the industry to detect any deficiencies in the contact lens market in Jordan, which will ease implementing current and future plans in developing contact lens practice and patient eye care in the region.