Striving Toward Better Eye Health Beyond Our Waiting Rooms: The LXXX Edward Jackson Memorial Lecture.

PURPOSE: Visual impairment (VI) negatively impacts the quality of lives of individuals and the optimal health of populations, creating both human and financial costs. Yet, VI has not risen to a level that is considered a priority in population health. This analysis assesses the evidence currently available for strengthening the value proposition for eye health, particularly the demographic characteristics and patient-centered outcomes found in clinical research. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis. METHOD: Two searches of the AJO database were performed using relevant key words: Search 1 (S1): NEI-sponsored clinical trials (1970-2023); and Search 2 (S2): Quality of life (2018-2023). The Scopus Cite Score was used as a filter for each search, specifically ≥50 for S1 and ≥20 for S2. RESULTS: Of the initial 466 articles found, 100 met the preestablished criteria. Age, sex, and race/ancestry/ethnicity were reported across glaucoma, retina, uveitis, cornea, and pediatrics subspecialties in 56% ± 9.7% of the articles; 37% ± 9.5% listed either age only or age, sex, or gender. The characterizations varied and subcategories were rarely reported. Only 2% of S1 and 25% of S2 noted patient-centered outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The characterization of study populations in the ophthalmic literature is limited by underreporting of patient-centered outcomes, useful for reaffirming the value of eye and vision health in population health. This analysis highlights the need for paying greater attention to more specific demographic categories and focusing more on patient-centered outcomes in clinical research.

Addressing Structural Racism Using a Whole-Scale Planning Process in a Single Academic Center.

Purpose: The murder of George Floyd in 2020 prompted a national demand for cultural transformation to confront the systemic racism prevalent in the country. Academic medical centers were not exempt from this urgent call. This article evaluates the efficacy of a strategic process in fostering cultural transformation within an academic medical system. Methods: A whole-scale strategic planning process was implemented over 13 months, involving multiple working groups representing key stakeholders from each entity across the system, an anonymous survey, a communication plan, and a balanced scorecard to monitor progress. More than 5500 voices, 160 recommendations, 122 data gathering sessions, and town hall meetings contributed to the creation and implementation of vital action items and a strategic framework. The Diversity Engagement Survey (DES) was administered 18 months following the process launch. Results: Of the 45,554 employees, students, faculty, and trainees, 96.5% completed unconscious bias education within the fiscal year and 76% of action items, termed "Just Do Its," were completed. Mission, vision, values, and strategic priorities were crafted to serve as a framework for intermediate and long-term actions. The DES revealed improvement in the "respect" attribute of an inclusive culture, and 64% of respondents confirmed that action for cultural transformation is addressing racism both within and outside of the institution. Conclusion: Implementing a shared purpose, engaging multiple working groups representing key stakeholders, and empowerment of stakeholders to implement changes, in conjunction with the development of a strategic framework addressing structural racism, resulted in the completion of vital action items to initiate cultural change.

Operationalizing inclusion: moving from an elusive goal to strategic action.

To mitigate the structural and institutional biases that contribute to inequities in health, we need a diverse cadre of individuals to feel included and advance within our field in order to bring a multicultural set of perspectives to the studies we conduct, the science we generate, the health and academic systems we design, and the medical and scientific knowledge we impart. There has been increasing focus on diversity, inclusion, and equity in recent years; however, often these terms are presented without adequate precision and, therefore, the inability to effectively operationalize inclusion and achieve diversity within organizations. This narrative review details several key studies, with the primary objective of presenting a roadmap to guide defining, measuring, and operationalizing inclusion within work and learning environments.

Asserting Accountability to Address Diversity: Report Card as a System of Measurement.

Problem: To the best of our knowledge, there are no standard accountability measures for diversity efforts at the departmental level. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to evaluate a multiprong report card as a structure for evaluation, tracking, and reporting as well as to examine any relationships between expenditures and outcomes. Approach: We instituted an intervention that offered leadership a report card of metrics related to diversity efforts. Included are diversity expenditures, benchmark demographic and departmental data, applications to support faculty salaries, participation in clerkship programs focused on attracting diverse candidates, and requests for candidate lists. The purpose of this analysis is to demonstrate the impact of the intervention. Outcomes: A significant relationship was found between faculty funding applications and under-represented minority (URM) representation in a department (0.19; confidence interval [95% CI] 0.17-0.21; p<0.001). An association was also found between total expenditures and URM representation in a department (0.002; 95% CI 0.002-0.003; p<0.001). Other outcomes include the following: (1) women, URM, and minority faculty have all increased in representation since tracking began; (2) diversity expenditures and faculty opportunity fund and presidential professorship applications have increased over time; and (3) a steady decline in departments with zero URM representation after the tracking of diversity expenditures in both clinical and basic science departments. Next Steps: Our findings suggest that standardized metrics for inclusion and diversity initiatives promote accountability and buy-in from executive leadership. Departmental detail enables tracking of progress longitudinally. Future work will continue to evaluate the downstream effects of diversity expenditures.

Gender Diversity on Corporate Boards Associated with Ophthalmology.

PURPOSE: Enhancing diversity on boards has been linked to greater profitability and innovation. Unfortunately, there remains an underrepresentation of women in executive management and leadership positions in the ophthalmic corporate world. The purpose of these analyses was to examine the gender composition of directors for boards associated with the discipline of ophthalmology. DESIGN: Cross-sectional research design. METHODS: Using contemporary data, we examined a specific cohort, the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) Foundation Ophthalmic Business Council corporate members as reported in the annual 2019 meeting program (N = 23). The board composition was analyzed using an online search of publicly available information in January and February 2020. The specific outcome measures included the number and percentage of women board members and their roles. RESULTS: There were a total of 23 Ophthalmic Business Council members with publicly available data; 37 of 195 total directorship seats (19%) were held by women, and 9 of 23 companies (39%) listed women as previous or current chairs of committees or outside corporations. Four of the 23 (17%) members of the Ophthalmic Business Council corporations had no women directors. CONCLUSIONS: The boards of directors of the AAO Foundation Ophthalmic Business Council corporate members remain predominately male. Despite the increasing number of women entering the specialty, women remain underrepresented in the corporate world of ophthalmology. Gender parity on boards is essential for the economic well-being of ophthalmic corporations as well as the relationship of the Ophthalmic Business Council with AAO members, health care systems, insurance carriers, government officials, and the public.

Employee Health and Wellness Outcomes Associated With Perceived Discrimination in Academic Medicine: A Qualitative Analysis.

Importance: Organizational culture and workplace interactions may enhance or adversely impact the wellness of all members of learning and work environments, yet a nuanced understanding of how such experiences within health care organizations impact the health and wellness of their membership is lacking. Objective: To identify and characterize the reported health and wellness outcomes associated with perceived discrimination among academic medicine faculty, staff, and students. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study analyzed anonymously submitted written narratives from 2016 that described experiences related to inclusion in the workplace or lack thereof. Narratives that described health outcomes associated with work- or school-based discrimination were purposively sampled. Participants were faculty, staff, and students at health-related schools or hospitals affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania. Data analysis was performed from March 2019 to January 2020. Exposures: Self-reported experiences, both witnessed and personal, of discrimination in the workplace. Results: A total of 315 narratives were collected, and 115 narratives from 115 participants were analyzed. Most respondents identified as female (70 respondents [60.9%]), non-Hispanic White (68 respondents [59.1%]), and heterosexual (89 respondents [77.4%]) and had worked at the institution for at least 1 year (99 respondents [86.0%]). The outcomes associated with adverse workplace experiences were broad and ranged in nature from emotional to mental and physical. Most reported outcomes were emotional (101 respondents [87.8%]), and more than 1 in 10 narratives (14 respondents [12.2%]) described a mental or physical health outcome. Many of the participants felt devaluated, overexerted, and hopeless, resulting in clinically relevant manifestations, such as increased stress and anxiety levels and even elevated blood pressure. Conclusions and Relevance: This qualitative study identified a continuum of negative outcomes on employee health and well-being associated with perceived discrimination and chronic exclusion in the workplace. These findings suggest the need for organizations to promote inclusion as a component of workplace wellness interventions.

Understanding Contributors to Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Emergency Department Throughput Times: a Sequential Mixed Methods Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ensuring equitable care remains a critical issue for healthcare systems. Nationwide evidence highlights the persistence of healthcare disparities and the need for research-informed approaches for reducing them at the local level. OBJECTIVE: To characterize key contributors in racial/ethnic disparities in emergency department (ED) throughput times. DESIGN: We conducted a sequential mixed methods analysis to understand variations in ED care throughput times for patients eventually admitted to an emergency department at a single academic medical center from November 2017 to May 2018 (n=3152). We detailed patient progression from ED arrival to decision to admit and compared racial/ethnic differences in time intervals from electronic medical record time-stamp data. We then estimated the relationships between race/ethnicity and ED throughput times, adjusting for several patient-level variables and ED-level covariates. These quantitative analyses informed our qualitative study design, which included observations and semi-structured interviews with patients and physicians. KEY RESULTS: Non-Hispanic Black as compared to non-Hispanic White patients waited significantly longer during the time interval from arrival to the physician's decision to admit, even after adjustment for several ED-level and patient demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic variables (Beta (average minutes) (SE): 16.35 (5.8); p value=.005). Qualitative findings suggest that the manner in which providers communicate, advocate, and prioritize patients may contribute to such disparities. When the race/ethnicity of provider and patient differed, providers were more likely to interrupt patients, ignore their requests, and make less eye contact. Conversely, if the race/ethnicity of provider and patient were similar, providers exhibited a greater level of advocacy, such as tracking down patient labs or consultants. Physicians with no significant ED throughput disparities articulated objective criteria such as triage scores for prioritizing patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest the importance of (1) understanding how our communication style and care may differ by race/ethnicity; and (2) taking advantage of structured processes designed to equalize care.

Assessment of Cumulative Incidence and Severity of Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Among Participants in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study After 20 Years of Follow-up.

Importance: Ocular hypertension is an important risk factor for the development of primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). Data from long-term follow-up can be used to inform the management of patients with ocular hypertension. Objective: To determine the cumulative incidence and severity of POAG after 20 years of follow-up among participants in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study. Design, Setting, and Participants: Participants in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study were followed up from February 1994 to December 2008 in 22 clinics. Data were collected after 20 years of follow-up (from January 2016 to April 2019) or within 2 years of death. Analyses were performed from July 2019 to December 2020. Interventions: From February 28, 1994, to June 2, 2002 (phase 1), participants were randomized to receive either topical ocular hypotensive medication (medication group) or close observation (observation group). From June 3, 2002, to December 30, 2008 (phase 2), both randomization groups received medication. Beginning in 2009, treatment was no longer determined by study protocol. From January 7, 2016, to April 15, 2019 (phase 3), participants received ophthalmic examinations and visual function assessments. Main Outcomes and Measures: Twenty-year cumulative incidence and severity of POAG in 1 or both eyes after adjustment for exposure time. Results: A total of 1636 individuals (mean [SD] age, 55.4 [9.6] years; 931 women [56.9%]; 1138 White participants [69.6%]; 407 Black/African American participants [24.9%]) were randomized in phase 1 of the clinical trial. Of those, 483 participants (29.5%) developed POAG in 1 or both eyes (unadjusted incidence). After adjusting for exposure time, the 20-year cumulative incidence of POAG in 1 or both eyes was 45.6% (95% CI, 42.3%-48.8%) among all participants, 49.3% (95% CI, 44.5%-53.8%) among participants in the observation group, and 41.9% (95% CI, 37.2%-46.3%) among participants in the medication group. The 20-year cumulative incidence of POAG was 55.2% (95% CI, 47.9%-61.5%) among Black/African American participants and 42.7% (95% CI, 38.9%-46.3%) among participants of other races. The 20-year cumulative incidence for visual field loss was 25.2% (95% CI, 22.5%-27.8%). Using a 5-factor baseline model, the cumulative incidence of POAG among participants in the low-, medium-, and high-risk tertiles was 31.7% (95% CI, 26.4%-36.6%), 47.6% (95% CI, 41.6%-53.0%), and 59.8% (95% CI, 53.1%-65.5%), respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, only one-fourth of participants in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study developed visual field loss in either eye over long-term follow-up. This information, together with a prediction model, may help clinicians and patients make informed personalized decisions about the management of ocular hypertension. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000125.

Assessment of Perceptions of Professionalism Among Faculty, Trainees, Staff, and Students in a Large University-Based Health System.

Importance: With a renewed focus on medical professionalism, an opportunity exists to better define its standards and application to meet the needs of an increasingly diverse workforce given the important association between interprofessional behavior and patient care. Objective: To examine the context of how professionalism is operationalized and perceived in diverse health care work and learning environments. Design, Setting, and Participants: A qualitative mixed-methods analysis of survey data collected from February to April 2015, was conducted followed by analysis of narrative data collected in June 2017. The setting was 2 health systems and 4 health professional and graduate schools. Participants were faculty, trainees, staff, and students (3506 survey respondents and 52 narratives) affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Pennsylvania Health System. Data analysis was conducted in 2018 and 2019. Exposures: Independent variables included the following respondent characteristics: gender identity, sexual orientation, race/ethnicity, position, generational age group, length of employment at institution, disability status, belief system or religion, and primary site of work or study. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survey questions were used to assess participants' perception and experiences of professionalism in the workplace as measured by a 5-point Likert-type scale. Results: For the survey, there were 3506 respondents from a pool of 18 550 potential respondents (18.9% response rate). Of 3506 survey respondents, 2082 of 3231 (64.4%) were women, 331 of 3164 (10.5%) identified as gender or sexual minority groups, and 360 of 3178 (11.3%) were non-Hispanic Black individuals. In adjusted analyses, women compared with men (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.8; 95% CI, 1.4-2.3) and Asian individuals (aOR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.7-2.3) and Hispanic individuals (aOR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.4-2.7) compared with non-Hispanic White individuals were more likely to value institutional professionalism. In addition, gender identity and sexual minority groups compared with heterosexual respondents (aOR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.8) and non-Hispanic Black individuals compared with non-Hispanic White individuals (aOR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.2-1.4) were statistically significantly more likely to consider changing jobs because of unprofessional behavior at work. The qualitative analysis of narratives revealed that marginalized populations (including but not limited to women, gender and sexual minority groups, racial/ethnic minority groups, those who identify as having a disability, and religious minority groups) reported (1) greater infringements on their professional boundaries, as well as increased scrutiny over their professional actions, and (2) a tension between inclusion vs assimilation. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study highlight the need for health care organizations to revisit how they define and operationalize professionalism to improve inclusivity.

The Influence of Gender and Underrepresented Minority Status on Medical Student Ranking of Residency Programs.

BACKGROUND: Physician diversity is linked to improved quality of care of diverse patient populations. The transition from medical school to residency is an opportunity to improve and increase workforce diversity in all specialties. However, there is limited published literature on the factors contributing to the ranking of residency programs on women and underrepresented minorities (URMs). OBJECTIVE: To characterize factors medical students used to rank residency programs and describe any differences based on race/ethnicity or gender. METHODS: A mixed-methods study consisting of a web-based survey and semi-structured interviews with National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) participating graduates over a two-year period. The survey assessed demographics and a 6-point Likert scale rating of various factors used to rank residency programs. Unpaired student t-tests were used to compare means. A subset of students was interviewed and a modified grounded theory approach identified decision-making themes as well as the role of gender and URM status. RESULTS: Out of a total of 316 invitations sent, 148 completed the survey (46.8% response rate), of which 21% of respondents self-identified as URMs. The majority of respondents graduated in 2014 (53%), and were male (51%). Participants ranked program atmosphere, reputation, location, and proximity to family the highest. URM students ranked patient population (p < 0.01), revisit opportunities (p = 0.04), gender diversity (p < 0.01), and ethnic diversity (p < 0.01) significantly higher than non-URM students. Female students ranked patient population (p < 0.01) and gender diversity (p < 0.01) significantly higher than males. Qualitative findings revealed differences in perceptions by URMs and non-URMs of patient population, revisit opportunities, gender diversity, and ethnic diversity. CONCLUSIONS: While all students prioritized pragmatic factors, women and URM students assess and weigh additional factors related to culture, inclusion, and diversity more than others. By tailoring recruitment strategies to meet the expectations of women and URMs, residency programs can better meet goals in becoming more diverse and inclusive.

Assessment of the Impact of an Endpoint Committee in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study.

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of a masked Endpoint Committee on estimates of the incidence of primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) treatment efficacy and statistical power of the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study-Phase 1, 1994-2002 (OHTS-1). DESIGN: Retrospective interrater reliability analysis of endpoint attribution by the Endpoint Committee. METHODS: After study closeout, we recalculated estimates of endpoint incidence, treatment efficacy, and statistical power using all-cause endpoints and POAG endpoints. To avoid bias, only the first endpoint per participant is included in this report. RESULTS: The Endpoint Committee reviewed 267 first endpoints from 1636 participants. The Endpoint Committee attributed 58% (155 of 267) of the endpoints to POAG. The incidence of all-cause endpoints vs POAG endpoints was 19.5% and 13.2%, respectively, in the observation group and 13.1% and 5.8%, respectively, in the medication group. Treatment effect for all-cause endpoints was a 33% reduction in risk (relative risk = 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] of 0.54-0.84) and a 56% reduction in risk for POAG endpoints (relative risk = 0.44, 95% CI of 0.31-0.61). Post hoc statistical power for detecting treatment effect was 0.94 for all-cause endpoints and 0.99 for POAG endpoints. CONCLUSION: Endpoint Committee adjudication of endpoints improved POAG incidence estimates, increased statistical power, and increased calculated treatment effect by 23%. An Endpoint Committee should be considered in therapeutic trials when common ocular and systemic comorbidities, other than the target condition, could compromise study results.

Measuring Organizational Cultural Competence to Promote Diversity in Academic Healthcare Organizations.

Purpose: To evaluate what drives respondent perceptions of health system organizational cultural competence. Methods: We estimated associations between survey respondent (n=3506) demographic characteristics, length of employment, position, and place of work and their reported perceptions of institutional culture. Results: In adjusted analyses, respondents self-identifying as non-Hispanic black versus non-Hispanic whites, females versus males, and lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender/queer versus heterosexuals were significantly less likely to rank the cultural competence of their organization above average. Conclusion: Minorities and women were less likely to rank their organization as culturally competent. Organizational efforts to achieve cultural competency would benefit from measuring this factor to target their efforts.