Confusion around Certification of Vision Impairment (CVI) and registration processes-are patients falling through the cracks?

BACKGROUND: In the UK, the Certificate of Vision Impairment (CVI) certifies a person as sight impaired (partially sighted) or severely sight impaired (blind). This is completed by ophthalmologists and passed with the patient's consent to their GP, their local authority, and The Royal College of Ophthalmologists Certifications office. Once a person is certified, they can be registered by their local authority which is voluntary but enables the person to access rehabilitation or habitation services, financial concessions, welfare benefits and other services provided by local authorities. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured individual interviews with 17 patients with a diagnosed eye condition, 4 Eye Clinic Liaison Officers (ECLO) and 4 referring optometrists around their experiences around CVI and registration processes. Analysis of themes was conducted with results synthesised in a narrative analysis. RESULTS: Patients reported lack of clarity around the processes of certification and registration, benefits of certification and what happens beyond certification, the type of support that they are entitled to, delays in accessing support. Optometrists appear not to engage with the process much, especially if the patient is being treated by the hospital eye service. CONCLUSION: Vision loss can be a devastating experience for the patient. There is a lack of information and confusion around the process. The lack of a joined-up process between certification and registration needs to be addressed if we are to provide the support that patients deserve in order to improve their quality of life and wellbeing.

Associations between diabetic retinopathy, mortality, disease, and mental health: an umbrella review of observational meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic retinopathy is a complication of diabetes affecting the eyes and can lead to blindless if left untreated. Several significant risk factors have been reported for DR, of which several can be classified as some form of disease. Furthermore, several systematic reviews have reported associations between several types of mortality and DR. Numerous meta-analyses have pooled the data on these factors, however, a systematic evaluation of these meta-analytic relationships is lacking. In this study, therefore, we performed an umbrella review of systematic reviews of meta-analyses for mortality, diseases and DR, grading the credibility of evidence. METHODS: A comprehensive database search for observational meta-analyses was conducted from inception until 29/04/2022 against pre-published inclusion criteria. For each meta-analytic outcome, a random-effects meta-analysis was re-conducted, stratifying by study design (and type of DR where possible) of included studies. Several statistical variables, including publication bias, heterogeneity, excess significance bias, and prediction intervals were used to grade the credibility of significant evidence from I to IV, using the recommendations from the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. RESULTS: Of the 1,834 initial results, 11 systematic reviews with meta-analyses were included covering 16 independent outcomes (total participants = 299,655; median participants per outcome: 7,266; median individual studies per outcome = 5). Overall, 10/16 outcomes (62.5%) yielded significant results, most of which were graded as 'highly suggestive' (Grade II) evidence. DR was associated with all-cause and cardio-vascular mortality, obstructive sleep apnoea, depression eating disorders, and several forms of cognitive impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Results show highly suggestive evidence for associations between health outcomes and/or conditions and DR. Public health professionals and practitioners should note these findings when developing and/or reviewing public health polices.

Knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding antimicrobial usage, spread and resistance emergence in commercial poultry farms of Rajshahi district in Bangladesh.

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate and injudicious use of antimicrobials in broiler and layer farms has become a common practice in lower and middle-income countries including Bangladesh. This study aimed to assess poultry farmers' knowledge, attitude, and practices regarding antimicrobial usage (AMU), and their beliefs in factors that affect antimicrobial resistance (AMR) spread and emergence in humans through commercial poultry farms in Bangladesh. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 204 farmers (95.6% male; meanage = 35.14 ± 10.25 years) in the Rajshahi district of Bangladesh who were recruited from three upazilas (sub-districts) through a multistage sampling technique. Data were collected from June to November 2021 via face-to-face interviews using a semi-structured questionnaire. RESULTS: The proportion of farmers who reported having received information regarding AMU from veterinarians was higher in layer compared to broiler farms (65.9% vs. 44.9%, p < 0.001). A higher proportion of layer compared to broiler farmers believed that antimicrobial residues and pathogens in poultry can pass to humans through the consumption of contaminated eggs (28.1% vs. 5.8%, p < 0.05). The mean score of the farmers' attitude towards addressing AMU was 4.49 (SD = 1.37) out of 7, with the higher score indicating a better attitude. The mean score of better attitudes towards addressing AMU was significantly higher among educated participants (bachelor's or higher levels of education (p = 0.006). A higher proportion of layer (56.3%) farmers did not keep a record of AMU when compared to broiler farmers (37.7%) (p = 0.012). More broiler (50.7%) compared to layer (38.5%) farmers continued using the full dose of antimicrobials (p = 0.042). The most frequently used antimicrobials in broiler and layer poultry farms were Colistin (broiler vs layer: 73.9% vs. 86.75%; p = 0.024), and Ciprofloxacin (broiler vs. layer: 95.7% vs. 84.4%; p = 0.021). Farmers' beliefs were significantly associated with the spread of AMR pathogens from contaminated eggs to humans (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The findings reflected that majority of farmers had inadequate knowledge of AMU, less knowledgeable beliefs aboutAMU, and inappropriate AMU (e.g., poor record keeping, incomplete doses) in chicken production systems. The government should ensure education or advisory services for poultry farmers on proper AMU, enforce current veterinary laws and regulations on antimicrobials, and implement AMU surveillance systems.

The prevalence of sensory changes in post-COVID syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Post-COVID syndrome can be defined as symptoms of COVID-19 that persist for longer than 12 weeks, with several studies reporting persistent symptoms relating to the sensory organs (eyes, ears, and nose). The aim of this systematic review was to examine the prevalence of persistent anosmia, hyposmia, ageusia, and hypogeusia, as well as eye/vision and ear/hearing related long-COVID symptoms. Authors searched the electronic databases from inception to November 2021. Search terms included words related to long-COVID, smell, taste, eyes/vision, and ears/hearing, with all observational study designs being included. A random effects meta-analysis was undertaken, calculating the prevalence proportions of anosmia, hyposmia, ageusia, and hypogeusia, respectively. From the initial pool, 21 studies met the inclusion criteria (total n 4,707; median n per study 125; median age = 49.8; median percentage female = 59.2%) and 14 were included in the meta-analysis The prevalence of anosmia was 12.2% (95% CI 7.7-16.6%), hyposmia 29.9% (95% CI 19.9-40%), ageusia 11.7% (95% CI 6.1-17.3%), and hypogeusia 31.2% (95% 16.4-46.1%). Several eye/vision and ear/hearing symptoms were also reported. Considering that changes in the sensory organs are associated with decreases in quality of life, future research should examine the etiology behind the persistent symptoms. Systematic review registration: [www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero], identifier [CRD42021292804].

Associations between vitamin D status and sight threatening and non-sight threatening diabetic retinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Vitamin D levels have been shown to be associated with diabetic retinopathy, however to date, no review has examined the relationship between vitamin D and sight threatening diabetic retinopathy (STDR) and non-sight threatening diabetic retinopathy (NSTDR). The aim of this review, therefore, was to pool associations between vitamin D deficiency (25(OH)D < 20 ng/mL) and STDR/NSTDR. A further aim was to examine associations between circulating 25(OH)D levels and STDR/NSTDR. Methods: A systematic review of major databases was undertaken for studies published from inception to 22/04/2022, using a pre-published protocol. Studies reporting prevalence of STDR or NSTDR versus a control group with diabetes and no DR or DME and either (a) vitamin D deficiency prevalence, or (b) circulating 25(OH)D levels, were included. A random effects meta-analysis was undertaken. Results: Following screening, 12 studies (n = 9057) were included in the meta-analysis. STDR was significantly associated with vitamin D deficiency (OR = 1.80 95%CI 1.40-2.30; p = <0.001), whereas NSTDR was not (OR = 1.07 95%CI 0.90-1.27; p = 0.48). Both conclusions were graded as low credibility of evidence. Furthermore, circulating 25(OH)D levels were significantly associated with both NSTDR (SMD = -0.27 95%CI -0.50; -0.04; p = 0.02) and STDR (SMD = -0.49 95%CI -0.90; -0.07; p = 0.02), although these were graded as low credibility of evidence. Conclusion: Vitamin D deficiency is significantly associated with STDR (including DME), but not with NSTDR. Given the well-reported associations between vitamin D deficiency and other unfavourable outcomes, it is important that vitamin D deficiency is managed appropriately and in a timely manner to reduce the risk of blindness in people with diabetes. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40200-022-01059-3.

Changes and correlates of screen time in adults and children during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Screen time has increased as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, and several correlates have been associated with these increases. These changes, however, have not been aggregated. It was the aim of this review to (a) aggregate changes in screen time in adults and children, and (b) report on variables in relation to screen time during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A systematic review of major databases was undertaken for studies published from inception to 06/12/2021, using a pre-published protocol (PROSPERO ID: CRD42021261422). Studies reporting (a) screen time pre-versus-during the pandemic, (b) screen time percentage change, or (c) correlates of screen time during the pandemic were included. A random effects meta-analysis was undertaken with subgroup analysis by age group and type of screen time. Findings: After review, 89 studies (n = 204,734; median age=20·6; median female=53·3%) were included. The majority of studies were cross-sectional. With regards to total screen time, primary aged children (6-10 years) reported largest increases (1·4 hrs/day; 95%CI 1·1-1·7), followed by adults (>18 years; 1·0 hrs/day; 95%CI 0·7-1·2), adolescents (11-17 years; 0·9 hrs/day; 95%CI 0·3-1·5), and young children (0-5 years; 0·6 hrs/day 95%CI 0·3-0·9 hrs/day). For leisure screen time (non-work/non-academic), primary aged children reported largest increases (1·0 hrs/day 95%CI 0·8-1·3), followed by adults (0·7hr/day 95%CI 0·3-1·2), young children (0·6 hrs/day; 95%CI 0·4-0·8), with adolescents reporting the lowest increase (0·5 hrs/day 95%CI 0·3-0·7). Several correlates were associated with reported increases in screen time, including adverse dietary behaviours, sleep, mental health, parental health, and eye health. Interpretation: Pooled evidence suggest that primary aged children reported the highest increase in both total and leisure screen time during COVID-19. It is recommended that screen time should be reduced in favour of non-sedentary activities. This study has the potential to inform public health policy and future guidance regarding screen time, and to inform future research in this area. Funding: No funding was received for this study.

Risks of Digital Screen Time and Recommendations for Mitigating Adverse Outcomes in Children and Adolescents.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic caused an unprecedented move to emergency remote learning around the world, leading to increased digital screen time for children and adolescents. This review highlights the potential risk of increased screen time to the eye and general health and makes recommendations to mitigate the risks posed. METHODS: A narrative review of evidence of increased digital time during the COVID-19 pandemic, the risks linked to increased screen time and offer possible steps to mitigate these in students. RESULTS: Digital screen time was found to have increased for children and adolescents in all the studies examined during the pandemic and data suggests that this has an impact on eye and general health. We discuss the associated risk factors and adverse outcomes associated with increased digital screen time. CONCLUSIONS: This review offers evidence of increased digital time, highlights some of the well-known and not so well-known risks linked to increased screen time, and offers possible steps to mitigate these in children and adolescents during the pandemic, as well as offering schools and parents strategies to support the eye health of children and adolescents post-pandemic. We discuss a number of interventions to reduce the risk of eye strain, myopia, obesity, and related diseases that have been shown to be linked to increased digital screen time.

Associations between diabetic retinopathy and modifiable risk factors: An umbrella review of meta-analyses.

AIMS: Several modifiable risk factors have been meta-analysed for diabetic retinopathy (DR), such as physical activity and vitamin D status. To date, these factors have not been systematically aggregated and the credibility of evidence assessed. Therefore, the aim of this umbrella review was to aggregate all modifiable risks of DR and assess the credibility of the evidence. METHODS: An umbrella review of meta-analyses was undertaken. For each meta-analytic association, random-effects effect size, 95% confidence intervals (CIs), heterogeneity, small-study effects, excess significance bias and 95% prediction intervals were calculated. The credibility of significant evidence (p < 0.05) was graded from I to IV, using pre-defined criteria. RESULTS: After initial searches, 13 studies were included covering 34 independent outcomes (total participants = 824,372). Positive associations were found between insulin usage and diabetic macular oedema (RR = 4.5; 95% CI 3.1-6.6), and DR risk (RR = 2.3; 95% CI 1.4-3.9) in people with type 2 diabetes. Vitamin D deficiency was associated with DR risk (OR = 2.8; 95% CI 1.1-7.1), as was obesity (RR = 1.34; 95% CI 1.06-1.68) and sedentary behaviour (RR = 1.22; 95%CI 1.03-1.44). Intensive blood pressure targets (RR = 0.8 95%CI 0.8-1.0), and moderate physical activity (RR = 0.69; 95%CI 0.53-0.91) yielded significant protective associations with DR. CONCLUSIONS: People with type 2 diabetes on insulin have a high risk of macular oedema and DR. Vitamin D deficiency yielded almost three times greater odds of DR, while intensive blood pressure control reduces DR risk by 20% and moderate physical activity by 31%. Healthcare professionals should use this evidence to identify those people most at risk to ensure that proper treatment and healthy lifestyles are recommended.

Understanding the determinants of COVID-19 vaccination intention and willingness to pay: findings from a population-based survey in Bangladesh.

BACKGROUND: Several coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccines have already been authorized and distributed in different countries all over the world, including Bangladesh. Understanding public acceptance of such a novel vaccine is vital, but little is known about the topic. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the determinants of intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine and willingness to pay (WTP) among people in Bangladesh. METHODS: An anonymous and online-based survey of Bangladeshi people (mean age = 29.96 ± 9.15 years; age range = 18-60 years) was conducted using a self-reported questionnaire consisting of socio-demographics, COVID-19 experience, and vaccination-related information as well as the health belief model (HBM). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine the factors influencing COVID-19 vaccination intent and WTP. RESULTS: Of the 894 participants, 38.5% reported a definite intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, whereas 27% had a probable intention, and among this intent group, 42.8% wanted to get vaccinated as soon as possible. Older age, feeling optimistic about the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination, believing that vaccination decreases worries and risk of COVID-19 infection, and being less concerned about side effects and safety of COVID-19 vaccination under the HBM construct were found to be significant factors in COVID-19 vaccination intention. Most of the participants (72.9%) were willing to pay for a COVID-19 vaccine, with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) amount of BDT 400/US$ 4.72 (IQR; BDT 200-600/US$ 2.36-7.07) per dose. Factors associated with higher WTP were younger age, being male, having higher education, residing in an urban area, having good self-rated health status, positivity towards COVID-19 vaccination's effectiveness, and being worried about the likelihood of getting infected with COVID-19. Participants who were COVID-19 vaccination intent preferred an imported vaccine over a domestically-made vaccine (22.9% vs. 14.8%), while 28.2% preferred a routine immunization schedule. CONCLUSION: The findings indicate a considerable proportion of Bangladeshi people intended to get vaccinated and had WTP for the COVID-19 vaccine. However, urgent education and awareness programs are warranted to alleviate public skepticism regarding the COVID-19 vaccination.