Estimated number of ophthalmologists worldwide (International Council of Ophthalmology update): will we meet the needs?

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To estimate 2015 global ophthalmologist data and analyse their relationship to income groups, prevalence rates of blindness and visual impairment and gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. METHODS: Online surveys were emailed to presidents/chairpersons of national societies of ophthalmology and Ministry of Health representatives from all 194 countries to capture the number and density (per million population) of ophthalmologists, the number/density performing cataract surgery and refraction, and annual ophthalmologist population growth trends. Correlations between these data and income group, GDP per capita and prevalence rates of blindness and visual impairment were analysed. RESULTS: In 2015, there were an estimated 232 866 ophthalmologists in 194 countries. Income was positively associated with ophthalmologist density (a mean 3.7 per million population in low-income countries vs a mean 76.2 in high-income countries). Most countries reported positive growth (94/156; 60.3%). There was a weak, inverse correlation between the prevalence of blindness and the ophthalmologist density. There were weak, positive correlations between the density of ophthalmologists performing cataract surgery and GDP per capita and the prevalence of blindness, as well as between GDP per capita and the density of ophthalmologists doing refractions. CONCLUSIONS: Although the estimated global ophthalmologist workforce appears to be growing, the appropriate distribution of the eye care workforce and the development of comprehensive eye care delivery systems are needed to ensure that eye care needs are universally met.

Influence of Japan's 2004 postgraduate training on ophthalmologist location choice, supply and distribution.

BACKGROUND: Highly-competent patient care is paramount to medicine. Quality training and patient accessibility to physicians with a wide range of specializations is essential. Yet, poor quality of life for physicians cannot be ignored, being detrimental to patient care and leading to personnel leaving the medical profession. In 2004, the Japanese government reformed postgraduate training for medical graduates, adding a 2-year, hands-on rotation through different specialties before the specialization residency was begun. Residents could now choose practice location, but it sparked concerns that physician distribution disparities had been created. Japanese media reported that residents were choosing specialties deemed to offer a higher quality of life, like Ophthalmology or Dermatology, over underserved areas like Obstetrics or Cardiology. To explore the consequences of Japan's policy efforts, through the residency reform in 2004, to improve physician training, analyzing ophthalmologist supply and distribution in the context of providing the best possible patient care and access while maintaining physician quality of life. METHODS: Using secondary data, we analyzed changes in ophthalmologist supply at the secondary tier of medical care (STM). We applied ordinary least-squares regression models to ophthalmologist density to reflect community factors such as residential quality and access to further professional development, to serve as predictors of ophthalmologist supply. Coefficient equality tests examined predictor differences before and after 2004. Similar analyses were conducted for all physicians excluding ophthalmologists (other physicians). Ophthalmologist coverage in top and bottom 10% of STMs revealed supply inequalities. RESULTS: Change in ophthalmologist supply was inversely associated with baseline ophthalmologist density before (P < .01) and after (P = .01) 2004. Changes in other physician supply were not associated with baseline other physician density before 2004 (P = 0.5), but positively associated after 2004 (P < .01). Inequalities between top and bottom 10% of ophthalmologist supply in STMs were large, with best-served areas maintaining roughly five times greater coverage than least-served areas. However, inequalities gradually declined between 1998 and 2012. CONCLUSIONS: Ophthalmologist supply increased both before and after the 2004 reform, yet contrary to media reports, proceeded at a lesser rate than supply increases for other physicians. After 2004, geographical disparities decreased for ophthalmologists, while increasing for other physicians.

The Challenge of Universal Eye Health in Latin America: distributive inequality of ophthalmologists in 14 countries.

BACKGROUND: No comprehensive study currently exists on the supply of ophthalmologists across Latin America. We explored sociogeographic inequalities in the availability and distribution of ophthalmologists across 14 Latin American countries. METHODS: The National Ophthalmologic Societies of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Chile, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela provided data on affiliated ophthalmologists by first-order subnational divisions in 2013. Human Development Index (HDI) estimates at the corresponding subnational division were used as equity stratifiers. Distributional inequality of ophthalmologists within each country was assessed by the health concentration index (HCI) and the index of dissimilarity (ID), along with the mean level of ophthalmologists per population. RESULTS: Across all countries studied, there were 5.2 ophthalmologists per 100 000 population on average (95% CI 5.0 to 5.4) in 2013, with a mean HCI of 0.26 (0.16 to 0.37) and a mean relative ID of 22.7% (20.9% to 24.7%). There was wide inequality in ophthalmologist availability between countries, ranging from 1.2 (1.1 to 1.4) in Ecuador to 8.6 (8.5 to 8.8) in Brazil. All countries had positive (ie, pro-rich) HCI values ranging from 0.68 (0.66 to 0.71) in Guatemala to 0.02 (-0.11 to 0.14) in Venezuela. Correspondingly, redistributive potential to achieve equity was closest in Venezuela (ID: 1.5%) and farthest in Guatemala (ID: 60.3%). Benchmarked against regional averages, most countries had a lower availability of ophthalmologists and higher relative inequality. CONCLUSIONS: There is high inequality in the level and distribution of ophthalmologists between and within countries in Latin America, with a disproportionate number concentrated in more developed, socially advantaged areas. More equitable access to ophthalmologists could be achieved by implementing incentivised human resources redistribution programmes and by improving the social determinants of health in underserved areas.