ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The role of glaucoma virtual clinics has developed to help meet demand for capacity within busy glaucoma services. There is limited research of patient and clinician experiences and perceptions of these clinics and the aim of this study is to provide further information to help improve patient experience and guide service delivery. METHODS: A mixed methods research design was employed comprising of a patient satisfaction survey, and patient and clinician interviews. Consultant ophthalmologists were recruited from throughout the UK, and patients and data gathering clinical staff recruited from the Manchester Royal Eye Hospital and Bristol Eye Hospital. RESULTS: We received a total of 148 patient satisfaction questionnaires with an overall response rate of 55.4%. Most respondents were diagnosed with primary open angle glaucoma (33.9%) at Manchester and glaucoma suspect status at Bristol (50.6%). Patients had high levels of confidence in the person conducting the tests (94.8% Manchester, 98.8% Bristol), and most were likely to recommend the service to family or friends (94.8% Manchester, 92.6% Bristol). We interviewed 10 consultant ophthalmologists, 10 data gathering staff and 20 patients. A number of key themes emerged from the transcribed interviews including: patient experience, clinician perception of patient experience, service delivery, staffing and staff experience, and patient safety. CONCLUSIONS: Glaucoma virtual clinics can be acceptable to both clinicians and patients, including those with a varied complexity of glaucoma and glaucoma-related disease. Dissatisfaction seemed to relate to poor communication or processes and systems within the service rather than complexity of disease.
Subject(s)
Glaucoma, Open-Angle , Glaucoma , Ocular Hypertension , Glaucoma/diagnosis , Glaucoma/therapy , Glaucoma, Open-Angle/diagnosis , Glaucoma, Open-Angle/therapy , Humans , Patient Satisfaction , Qualitative Research , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Glaucoma referral filtering schemes have operated in the UK for many years. However, there is a paucity of data on the false-negative (FN) rate. This study evaluated the clinical effectiveness of the Manchester Glaucoma Enhanced Referral Scheme (GERS), estimating both the false-positive (FP) and FN rates. METHOD: Outcome data were collected for patients newly referred through GERS and assessed in 'usual-care' clinics to determine the FP rate (referred patients subsequently discharged at their first visit). For the FN rate, glaucoma suspects deemed not requiring referral following GERS assessment were invited to attend for a 'reference standard' examination including all elements of assessment recommended by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) by a glaucoma specialist optometrist. A separate 33 cases comprising randomly selected referred and non-referred cases were reviewed independently by two glaucoma specialist consultant ophthalmologists to validate the reference standard assessment. RESULTS: 1404 patients were evaluated in GERS during the study period; 651 (46.3%) were referred to the Hospital Eye Service (HES) and 753 (53.6%) were discharged. The FP rate in 307 assessable patients referred to the HES was 15.5%. This study reviewed 131 (17.4%) of those patients not referred to the HES through the GERS scheme; 117 (89.3%) were confirmed as not requiring hospital follow-up; 14 (10.7%) required follow-up, including 5 (3.8%) offered treatment. Only one patient (0.8%) in this sample met the GERS referral criteria and was not referred (true FN). There were no cases of missed glaucoma or non-glaucomatous pathology identified within our sample. CONCLUSION: The Manchester GERS is an effective glaucoma filtering scheme with a low FP and FN rate.
Subject(s)
Glaucoma/diagnosis , Intraocular Pressure/physiology , Vision Screening/methods , Visual Fields/physiology , Adult , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Glaucoma/physiopathology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to describe the findings of a national survey that aimed to estimate the proportion of Hospital Eye Service (HES) units using glaucoma virtual clinics, to determine how these services differ and to gauge clinicians' views and opinions on the safety and acceptability of this model of care compared with usual care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This 12-question survey was disseminated nationally to 92 clinical lead consultant ophthalmologists using SurveyMonkey. RESULTS: The response rate was 45.7%. There were 21 out of the total 42 respondents (50.0%) who were based at an NHS Trust where glaucoma virtual clinics were already being used and a further 9 (21.4%) were planning to establish one. Clinical leads largely rated efficiency and patient safety to be at least equivalent to usual care (92.9%) and 81.0% perceived glaucoma virtual clinics to be acceptable to patients. The main reasons for not running glaucoma virtual clinics were insufficient staff (71.4%) and inadequate space (47.6%). The majority of those running virtual clinics used this model of care for 'lower risk' patients such as ocular hypertensives (90.5%) and glaucoma suspects. CONCLUSION: Glaucoma virtual clinics are employed by a large proportion of HES units, with many seeking to develop such services. Clinical leads largely rate efficiency, patient safety and the perception of patient acceptability to be at least equivalent to usual care.
