The Association of Race, Ethnicity, and Insurance Status with the Visual Acuity of Retinoblastoma Survivors in the IRIS® Registry.

PURPOSE: To identify sociodemographic factors associated with the visual outcomes of retinoblastoma survivors. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using a US-based clinical data registry. All individuals < 18 years of age with a history of retinoblastoma in the Intelligent Research in Sight (IRIS®) Registry (1/1/2013-12/31/2020). The primary outcome was visual acuity below the threshold for legal blindness (20/200 or worse) in at least one eye. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between visual outcomes and age, sex, laterality, race, ethnicity, type of insurance, and geographic location. RESULTS: This analysis included 1545 children with a history of retinoblastoma. The median length of follow-up was 4.1 years (IQR, 2.2-5.9 years) and the median age at most recent clinical visit was 12 years (IQR, 8-16 years). Retinoblastoma was unilateral in 54% of cases. Poor vision in at least one eye was identified in 78% of all children and poor vision in both eyes in 17% of those with bilateral disease. Poor visual outcomes were associated with unilateral diagnosis (OR, 1.55; 95% CI,1.13-2.12; p = .007), Black race (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.19-3.47; p = .010), Hispanic ethnicity (OR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.16-2.37; p = .006), and non-private insurance (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.02-2.10; p = .037). CONCLUSIONS: Poor visual outcomes appear to be more common among Black, Hispanic, and publicly insured children with a history of retinoblastoma, raising concerns regarding healthcare inequities. Primary care physicians should ensure that young children receive red reflex testing during routine visits and consider retinoblastoma in the differential diagnosis of abnormal eye exams.

Racial Disparities in Glaucoma Vision Outcomes and Eye Care Utilization: An IRIS Registry Analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate racial disparities in vision outcomes and eye care utilization among glaucoma patients. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: In this population-based IRIS Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight) study, we included patients with minimum one diagnosis code for glaucoma at least 6 months prior to January 1, 2015 and at least one eye exam, visual field (VF), optical coherence tomography (OCT), or eye-related inpatient or emergency department (ED) code in 2015. Multivariable logistic and negative binomial regression models were used to assess vision and utilization outcomes, respectively, across race and ethnicity from January 1, 2015 to January 1, 2020. Vision outcomes included cup-to-disc ratio (CDR) progression > 0.80, poor vision (visual acuity 20/200 or worse), low vision codes, and need for glaucoma filtering surgery. Utilization outcomes included outpatient eye exams, OCTs, VFs, inpatient/ED encounters, and lasers/surgeries. RESULTS: Among 996,297 patients, 73% were non-Hispanic White, 15% non-Hispanic Black, 9% Hispanic, 3% Asian/Pacific Islander, and 0.3% Native American/Alaska Native. Compared to White eyes, Black and Hispanic eyes had higher adjusted odds of CDR progression (odds ratio [OR] = 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08-1.17; OR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.22-1.34), poor vision (OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.22-1.29; OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.22-1.31), glaucoma filtering surgery (rate ratio (RR) = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.42-1.51; RR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.09-1.18). Hispanic eyes also had increased odds of low vision diagnoses (Hispanic OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.07-1.30). Black and Hispanic patients were less likely to have eye exams (RR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.94-0.95; RR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.99-0.99) and OCTs (RR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.85-0.86; RR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.96-0.98), yet Black patients had higher odds of inpatient/ED encounters (RR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.37-1.96) compared to White patients. Native American patients were more likely to have poor vision (OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.01-1.36) and less likely to have outpatient visits (RR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.86-0.91), OCTs (RR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.82-0.89), visual fields (RR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.88-0.94) or lasers/surgeries (RR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.79-0.96) compared to White patients. CONCLUSIONS: We found that significant disparities in US eye care exist with Black, Hispanic, and Native American patients having worse vision outcomes and less disease monitoring. Glaucoma may be undertreated in these racial and ethnic minority groups, increasing risk for glaucoma-related vision loss.

Patient and Visit Characteristics Associated With Otolaryngology Telemedicine Care.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians are increasingly adopting telemedicine in an effort to expand patient access and efficiently deliver care. The degree of health disparities among patients receiving otolaryngologic telemedical care is unclear. AIMS: We performed a retrospective cross-sectional study to explore disparities in telemedicine delivery. METHODS: We evaluated otolaryngology clinical visits from January 2019 to November 2022. We obtained patient demographics and visit characteristics (e.g., subspecialty, telemedicine vs in-person). Our primary outcome was demographic characteristics of otolaryngology patients who received telemedicine vs in-person care during the study timeframe. RESULTS: A total of 231,384 otolaryngology clinical visits were reviewed, of which 26,895 (11.6%) were telemedicine visits. Rhinology (36.5%) and facial plastics (28.4%) subspecialties performed the most telemedicine visits. On multivariate analysis, individuals who identified as Asian, non-English speaking, and with Medicare insurance were statistically significantly less likely to use telemedicine than in-person services. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that expanding telemedicine care may not improve access for all populations, and socioeconomic factors are important considerations to ensure patients are receiving equally accessible care. Futures studies are warranted to understand how these disparities may impact health outcomes and patient satisfaction with care.

United States Population Disparities in Ophthalmic Care: Blindness and Visual Impairment in the IRIS® Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight).

PURPOSE: To evaluate associations of patient characteristics with United States eye care use and likelihood of blindness. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (19 546 016) with 2018 visual acuity (VA) records in the American Academy of Ophthalmology's IRIS® Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight). METHODS: Legal blindness (20/200 or worse) and visual impairment (VI; worse than 20/40) were identified from corrected distance acuity in the better-seeing eye and stratified by patient characteristics. Multivariable logistic regressions evaluated associations with blindness and VI. Blindness was mapped by state and compared with population characteristics. Eye care use was analyzed by comparing population demographics with United States Census estimates and proportional demographic representation among blind patients versus a nationally representative US population sample (National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey [NHANES]). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence and odds ratios for VI and blindness; proportional representation in the IRIS® Registry, Census, and NHANES by patient demographics. RESULTS: Visual impairment was present in 6.98% (n = 1 364 935) and blindness in 0.98% (n = 190 817) of IRIS patients. Adjusted odds of blindness were highest among patients ≥ 85 years old (odds ratio [OR], 11.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10.33-13.59 vs. those 0-17 years old). Blindness also was associated positively with rural location and Medicaid, Medicare, or no insurance vs. commercial insurance. Hispanic (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.46-1.74) and Black (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.63-1.84) patients showed a higher odds of blindness versus White non-Hispanic patients. Proportional representation in IRIS Registry relative to the Census was higher for White than Hispanic (2- to 4-fold) or Black (11%-85%) patients (P < 0.001). Blindness overall was less prevalent in NHANES than IRIS Registry; however, prevalence in adults aged 60+ was lowest among Black participants in the NHANES (0.54%) and second highest among comparable Black adults in IRIS (1.57%). CONCLUSIONS: Legal blindness from low VA was present in 0.98% of IRIS patients and associated with rural location, public or no insurance, and older age. Compared with US Census estimates, minorities may be underrepresented among ophthalmology patients, and compared with NHANES population estimates, Black individuals may be overrepresented among blind IRIS Registry patients. These findings provide a snapshot of US ophthalmic care and highlight the need for initiatives to address disparities in use and blindness. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Bias and Non-Diversity of Big Data in Artificial Intelligence: Focus on Retinal Diseases.

Artificial intelligence (AI) applications in healthcare will have a potentially far-reaching impact on patient care, however issues regarding algorithmic bias and fairness have recently surfaced. There is a recognized lack of diversity in the available ophthalmic datasets, with 45% of the global population having no readily accessible representative images, leading to potential misrepresentations of their unique anatomic features and ocular pathology. AI applications in retinal disease may show less accuracy with underrepresented populations that may further widen the gap of health inequality if left unaddressed. Beyond disease symptomatology, social determinants of health must be integrated into our current paradigms of disease understanding, with the goal of more personalized care. AI has the potential to decrease global healthcare inequality, but it will need to be based on a more diverse, transparent and responsible use of healthcare data.

A Retrospective Study of Disparities in an Academic Ophthalmic Emergency Department.

Purpose Emergency medicine is a common access point to health care; disparities in this care by demographic characteristics, including race and ethnicity, may affect outcomes. The Massachusetts Eye and Ear (MEE) Emergency Department (ED) is a subspecialty emergency department; data from this site can be utilized to better understand social determinants of quality ophthalmic care. Design This is a retrospective cross sectional cohort study in the MEE ED examining patient visits from June 1, 2016 to June 30, 2019. Methods Using the electronic medical record system, all unique visits were identified between June 1, 2016 and June 30, 2019 (inclusive); patient demographics (sex, race, ethnicity [Hispanic vs. non-Hispanic], primary care provider [PCP] status, insurance type, zip code, primary language), date of visit, triage category and outcomes (final diagnosis, visit duration, and next visit at MEE within 3 months of the ED visit) were collected. Kaplan-Meier plots were used to visualize likelihood of follow-up visit to MEE for urgent patients based on demographics. Multivariate linear regression was used to examine factors affecting visit durations, as stratified by urgency, and Cox proportional hazards regression was used to establish hazard ratios for next visit to MEE. Results Of the 46,248 ophthalmology ED initial visits, only triage status, season of visit, out-of-state residency, Medicare coverage, and Medicaid coverage led to statistically significant differences in visit durations for urgent visits compared with the respective reference groups. Similar trends persisted within the non-urgent visit cohort for visit durations. Residency, insurance coverage, season of visit, race, PCP status, and sex were identified as statistically significant predictors of the likelihood of a follow-up visit. Conclusion Data from an ophthalmic emergency department suggest that demographic factors do impact patient visit duration and time to follow-up visit. These findings suggest a continued need for attention to social determinants of health and equitable care of patients within ophthalmology.