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.

Relationship between Claims-Based Frailty Index and Eye Care Utilization among Medicare Beneficiaries with Glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To determine differences in eye care utilization by frailty levels among Medicare beneficiaries with glaucoma. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries over 65 years of age with glaucoma, identified using International Classification of Diseases codes before July 1, 2014. METHODS: By using a validated claims-based frailty index (range, 0-1), beneficiaries were classified as nonfrail/prefrail (0-0.19), mildly frail (0.20-0.29), and moderate-to-severely frail (≥ 0.30). Negative binomial regression analyses were used to estimate incident rate ratios (IRRs) of eye care utilization by frailty levels between July 1, 2014, and December 31, 2016. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Current Procedural Terminology codes for eye examinations and eye care-related office visits; eye care-related inpatient and emergency department (ED) encounters; eye care-related nursing facility and home-visit encounters; visual field (VF) and retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) OCT tests; and selective laser trabeculoplasties (SLTs) and glaucoma surgeries. RESULTS: Among 76 260 Medicare beneficiaries with glaucoma, the mean age was 78.9 years (standard deviation, 7.8), female beneficiaries constituted 60.5%, and 78.7% of beneficiaries self-identified as non-Hispanic White. According to a claims-based frailty index, 79.5% of beneficiaries were nonfrail/prefrail, 17.1% were mildly frail, and 3.4% were moderate-to-severely frail. Moderate-to-severely frail beneficiaries were less likely than nonfrail/prefrail beneficiaries to have outpatient encounters (IRR, 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-0.88); VF tests (IRR, 0.64, 95% CI, 0.60-0.67); RNFL OCT tests (IRR, 0.77, 95% CI, 0.73-0.81); SLT (IRR, 0.74, 95% CI, 0.60-0.92); and glaucoma surgery (IRR, 0.74, 95% CI 0.55-0.99), after adjusting for age, gender, glaucoma severity, race, and socioeconomic status. Compared with nonfrail/prefrail beneficiaries, moderate-to-severely frail beneficiaries had higher rates of inpatient/ED encounters (IRR, 5.03, 95% CI, 2.36-10.71) and nursing facility/home-visit encounters (IRR, 34.89, 95% CI, 14.82-82.13). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with nonfrail/prefrail Medicare beneficiaries with glaucoma, beneficiaries with moderate-to-severe frailty had lower rates of eye care utilization in the outpatient setting and higher rates of utilization in acute care settings. This suggests that frail patients may receive less disease monitoring and fewer interventions for their glaucoma management. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Impact of the Affordable Care Act on Glaucoma Severity at First Presentation.

PURPOSE: To test whether the increase in insurance coverage in Massachusetts due to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is associated with a decrease in glaucoma severity in patients presenting for the first time at a tertiary health system. METHODS: Clinical and billing data of first-time glaucoma patients from a tertiary health system in Massachusetts from 2006 to 2021 was used. Pre-ACA is defined as before 2014 and post-ACA is defined as after 2014. Visual field mean deviation was used to define glaucoma severity: greater than -6 dB, less than -6 dB and greater than -12 dB, and less than -12 dB was classified as "mild," "moderate," and "severe" respectively. Ordinal logistic regression models adjusted for age, race, gender, and insurance type were used to determine the odds of presenting with more severe glaucoma. RESULTS: 2,394 pre-ACA and 3,651 post-ACA first-time glaucoma patients were identified. There was no significant difference in the likelihood of more severe glaucoma at first presentation post-ACA compared to pre-ACA (OR=0.96; 95% CI 0.86-1.08; p=0.49) among the entire population. In stratified analyses, patients who utilized Medicaid for insurance had 52% decreased odds for presenting with more severe glaucoma at first presentation post-ACA compared to pre-ACA (OR=0.48; 95% CI 0.33-0.69; p<0.001). This remained significant after adjustment for age, race, and gender (adjusted OR=0.44; 95% CI 0.29-0.65; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: At a Massachusetts-based tertiary healthcare center, individuals on Medicaid were more likely to have more severe glaucoma at first presentation before the implementation of the ACA, compared to after.

Enhancing Diversity in the Ophthalmology Workforce.

Health care teams are most effective at addressing complex problems and improving health outcomes for underserved populations when team members bring diverse life experiences and perspectives to the effort. With rates of visual impairment expected to increase in the United States by 2050, especially among minority populations, diversification of the ophthalmology workforce will be critical in reducing disparities in access to and quality of vision health care. Currently, ophthalmology is less diverse with respect to race, ethnicity, and gender than graduating medical classes and other medical specialties, as well as the general US population. In addition, data on diversity in sexual orientation and gender identity, socioeconomic status, and disability are lacking in ophthalmology. The Minority Ophthalmology Mentoring and Rabb-Venable Excellence in Ophthalmology Programs are examples of initiatives to increase racial and ethnic diversity in the workforce and can serve as models for increasing other aspects of inclusiveness. Other strategies for improving vision health care for all Americans include continuing to support existing diversity programs and creating new ones; addressing unconscious and implicit bias in medical school, residency, and faculty selections; conducting holistic reviews of medical school and residency applications; diversifying selection committees and leadership; and encouraging faculty development of underrepresented groups.

Sex-Based Differences in Medicare Reimbursements among Ophthalmologists Persist across Time.

PURPOSE: To evaluate differences in Medicare reimbursements between male and female ophthalmologists between 2013 and 2019. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Ophthalmologists receiving Medicare reimbursements between 2013 and 2019. METHODS: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File was used to determine total reimbursements and number of services submitted by ophthalmologists between 2013 and 2019. Reimbursements were standardized to account for geographic differences in Medicare reimbursement per service. Data from the American Community Survey (ACS) were used to determine socioeconomic characteristics (unemployment, poverty, income, and education) by zip code for the location of each physician's practice. A multivariate linear regression model was used to evaluate differences in annual reimbursements by sex, accounting for calendar year, years of experience, total number of services, ACS zip code data, and proportion of procedural services. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Annual Medicare reimbursement and use of billing codes (e.g., outpatient office visits and eye examinations, diagnostic testing, laser treatment, and surgery). RESULTS: Among 20 281 ophthalmologists who received Medicare reimbursements between 2013 and 2019, 15 451 (76%) were men. The most common billing codes submitted were for outpatient visits and eye examinations (13.8 million charges/year), diagnostic imaging of the retina (5.6 million charges/year), intravitreal injections (2.9 million charges/year), and removal of cataract with insertion of lens (2.4 million charges/year). Compared with men, female ophthalmologists received less in median annual reimbursements (median, $94 734.21 [interquartile range (IQR), $30 944.52-$195 701.70] for women vs. $194 176.90 [IQR, $76 380.76-$355 790.80] for men; P < 0.001) and billed for fewer annual median services (median, 1228 [IQR, 454-2433] vs. 2259 [IQR, 996-4075, respectively]; P < 0.001). After adjustment for covariates, female ophthalmologists billed for 1015 fewer services (95% confidence interval [CI], 1001-1029; P < 0.001) and received $20 209.12 less in reimbursements than men (95% CI, -$21 717.57 to -$18 700.66; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Female ophthalmologists billed for fewer services and received less in reimbursement from Medicare than men over time and across all categories of billing codes. Disparities persisted after controlling for physician and practice characteristics.

Racial and Socioeconomic Differences in Eye Care Utilization among Medicare Beneficiaries with Glaucoma.

PURPOSE: Evaluate differences in eye care utilization among patients with glaucoma by race and socioeconomic status (SES). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Representative 5% sample of Medicare beneficiaries aged > 65 years with continuous part A/B enrollment between January 1, 2014, and July 1, 2014, at least 1 diagnosis code for glaucoma within that period, and a glaucoma diagnosis in the Chronic Conditions Warehouse before January 1, 2014. METHODS: The following race/ethnicity categories were defined in our cohort: non-Hispanic White, Black/African American, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander. Low SES was defined as having 2 or more enrollment-based low-income indicators (dual eligibility for Medicare/Medicaid, Part D limited income subsidies, and eligibility for Part A and B State buy-in). Negative binomial regression analyses were carried out to compare relative rate ratios (RRs) of eye care utilization among racial groups stratified by low and non-low SES. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Measured from July 1, 2014, to December 31, 2016: eye examinations and eye care-related office visits; eye care-related inpatient and emergency department (ED) encounters; eye care-related nursing home and home-visit encounters; visual field and retinal nerve fiber OCT tests; glaucoma lasers and surgeries. RESULTS: Among 78 526 participants with glaucoma, mean age was 79.1 years (standard deviation, 7.9 years), 60.9% were female, 78.4% were non-Hispanic White, and 13.8% met enrollment-based criteria for low-SES. Compared with White beneficiaries, Blacks had lower counts of outpatient visits (RR, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90-0.93), visual field (VF) tests (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.90-0.94), but more inpatient/ED encounters (RR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.55-3.78) and surgeries (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03-1.27). Hispanics had fewer outpatient visits (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98) and retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) OCT tests (RR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.86-0.93), but more inpatient/ED encounters (RR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.18-4.57) and selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) (RR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.11-1.42) versus non-Hispanic Whites. In the non-low SES group, Black versus White disparities persisted in outpatient visits (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.92-0.95), VF (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94-0.98), RNFL OCT (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.78-0.83), and inpatient/ED encounters (RR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.55-4.26). CONCLUSIONS: Disparities were found in eye care utilization among Black and Hispanic patients with glaucoma. These differences persisted among Blacks after stratification by SES, suggesting that systemic racism may be an independent driver in this population.