Interspecialty Opioid Prescribing Patterns in Ophthalmology Following Declaration of a Public Health Emergency.

Purpose: Previous literature has investigated opioid prescription trends in ophthalmology at large, however, little has been done looking at differences between subspecialties. We evaluate if significant trends exist among subspecialties in opioid prescribing patterns. This study aims to illuminate potential over-usage of opioids in ophthalmology that could compromise patient quality of life. Methods: Medicare data and "National Plan and Provider Enumeration System (NPPES) Downloadable File" were queried for cases of ophthalmologists with nonsuppressed opioid prescription data from 2014 to 2019. Ophthalmologists with no subspecialty code or missing regional, gender, degree, or graduation information were excluded. Chi-squared analysis, analysis of variance, t-tests, and multivariate logistic regression were utilized. Results: Five thousand one hundred forty-three physician records were included in analysis, 450 of which were by cornea subspecialists. Most cornea cases were male, graduated before 2005, and practiced in the South. All subspecialties had a significantly increased likelihood of making opioid claims and higher prescription rates compared with cornea (P < 0.050) besides glaucoma (P = 0.357). Only oculoplastics had significantly increased likelihood of greater total supply of opioids compared with cornea (odds ratio [OR] = 22.195, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 12.209-40.350, P < 0.001), while pediatrics (OR = 4.036, 95% CI = 1.377-11.831, P = 0.011) and neuro-ophthalmology (OR = 4.158, 95% CI = 1.237-13.975, P = 0.021) in addition to oculoplastics (OR = 64.380, 95% CI = 26.306-157.560, P < 0.001) were predicted to have significantly greater opioid beneficiaries. Males, the South/Midwest, and graduating before 2005, all were generally associated with increased likelihood of greater total opioid claims, supply, beneficiaries, and prescription rate (P < 0.050). Conclusion: Subspecialty, demographic, chronological, and regional trends exist for opioid prescribing patterns in ophthalmology.

Female authorship trends and the effect of COVID-19 on cataract and refractive surgery literature.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether gender barriers persist specifically in the cataract and refractive surgery (CRS) literature. In addition, no literature exists investigating the long-term effect of COVID-19 on female authorship in ophthalmology past 2020. SETTING: Scopus 2015 to 2022. DESIGN: Retrospective data review. METHODS: Articles published in the Journal of Refractive Surgery and the Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery were recorded from January 2015 to February 2022 from Scopus. Articles with only 1 author or where gender could not be identified were excluded. The first author (FA) gender, senior author (SA) gender, affiliated country, type of literature, and number of citations were collected. Pearson chi-squared tests with phi coefficients and multivariate logistic regression were performed. RESULTS: 3153 articles were included in analysis. There were 910 works with female FAs and 648 with female SAs. Gender did not predict publishing in one journal over the other (P > .050). Women made up less than 30% of authorship of all types of literature, except for prospective/observational studies as FA (31.3%). Compared with before 2020, female FAs from 2020 onward were associated with increased retrospective analysis (phi = 0.072, P = .030) and letters/editorials (phi = 0.134, P < .001) but decreased case reports (phi = 0.087, P = .009) and "others" (phi = -0.164, P < .001). Similar associations were observed for female SAs. Females were more likely to publish in Asian countries. Female SAs predicted an increased likelihood of female FAs (odds ratio, 1.401, 95% CI, 1.165-1.684, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Gender disparities exist in authorship of the CRS literature. COVID-19 has altered the types of literature published by women, but men still publish most of all types of CRS research.