Worsening vision at age 4-5 in England post-COVID: Evidence from a large database of vision screening data.

PURPOSE: Myopia prevalence has increased in the UK at age 10-16y, but little is known about younger children. We hypothesise that if the 'myopia epidemic' is affecting young children, then there will be increasing rates of bilateral reduced unaided vision (V) at vision screenings of children 4-5 years of age. METHODS: Retrospective anonymised data from computerised vision screening at age 4-5 years were analysed from serial cross-sectional data. Refractive error is not assessed in UK vision screening, so vision was investigated. Data were only included from schools that screened every year from 2015/16 to 2021/22. The criterion used was unaided monocular logMAR (automated letter-by-letter scoring) vision >0.20 in both the right and left eyes, so as to maximise the chances of detecting bilateral, moderate myopia rather than amblyopia. RESULTS: Anonymised raw data were obtained for 359,634 screening episodes from 2075 schools. Once schools were excluded where data were not available for every year and data were cleaned, the final database comprised 110,076 episodes. The proportion (percentage and 95% CI) failing the criterion from 2015/16 to 2021/22 were 7.6 (7.2-8.0), 8.5 (8.1-8.9), 7.5 (7.1-7.9), 7.8 (7.4-8.2), 8.7 (8.1-9.2), 8.5 (7.9-9.0) and 9.3 (8.8-9.7), respectively. The slope of the regression line showed a trend for increasing rates of reduced bilateral unaided vision, consistent with increasing frequency of myopia (p = 0.06). A decreasing linear trendline was noted for children 'Under Professional Care'. CONCLUSIONS: For children 4-5 years of age, there were signs of reduced vision over the last 7 years in England. Consideration of the most likely causes support the hypothesis of increasing myopia. The increase in screening failures highlights the importance of eye care in this young population.

Referrals from community optometrists in England and their replies: A mixed methods study.

PURPOSE: Community optometrists, through routine eye examinations, identify patients with disease or ocular abnormalities requiring referral to the Hospital Eye Service. In many cases no reply to the referral letter is received, resulting in some patients being re-referred unnecessarily, potentially increasing the number of other patients who lose sight whilst on hospital waiting lists. This study investigated, qualitatively and quantitatively, factors influencing optometric referrals and replies. METHODS: The three-phase, sequential mixed methods study started with a literature review and qualitative phase, interviewing stakeholders to identify issues for exploration in subsequent phases. The second, quantitative phase, undertook documentary analysis of 349 patient referral records from three optometric practice modalities (domiciliary, independently owned, and corporate chain) in England. A final qualitative phase obtained views from stakeholders to explore unexplained findings from the first two phases. RESULTS: Phase 1 identified communication, financial, professional and technological issues for further exploration. In Phase 2, the referral rate was 22.2% for domiciliary provider, 2.1% for independent practice and 2.5% for the corporate chain, with the variation most likely explained by patient age and associated ophthalmic disease, illness and disability. The referral reply rate was 5.7% for domiciliary provider, 25.0% for independent practice and 4.9% for the corporate chain. The community optometrist remained unaware of the outcome of their referral in 72.8% of cases. Qualitative analyses indicate the main factors influencing referral reply rates are technology, the General Medical Practitioner, community optometrists' utility to and utility of the National Health Service and patient mobilisation. CONCLUSIONS: The low referral reply rate creates a break in the feedback loop required to raise the standard of referrals and avoid unnecessary re-referral. Of the factors identified that influence referral reply rates, technology is key in view of the increasing use of online referral platforms. Feedback to the referring optometrist should be embedded in such systems.

Referrals from community optometrists to the hospital eye service in Scotland and England.

OBJECTIVES: This audit assesses communication between community optometrists (COs) and hospital eye service (HES) in Scotland and England. METHODS: Optometric referrals and replies were extracted from six practices in Scotland and England. If no reply was found, replies/records were copied from HES records. De-identified referrals, replies and records were audited against established standards, evaluating whether referrals were necessary, accurate and directed to the appropriate professional. The referral rate (RR) and referral reply rate (RRR) were calculated. RESULTS: From 905 de-identified referrals, RR ranged from 2.6 to 8.7%. From COs' perspective, the proportion of referrals for which they received replies ranged from 37 to 84% (Scotland) and 26 to 49% (England). A total of 88-96% of referrals (Scotland) and 63-76% (England) were seen in the HES. Adjusting for cases when it is reasonable to expect replies, RRR becomes 45-92% (Scotland) and 38-62% (England) with RRR significantly greater in Scotland (P = 0.015). Replies were copied to patients in 0-21% of cases. Referrals were to the appropriate service and judged necessary in ≥90% of cases in both jurisdictions. Accuracy of referral ranged from 89 to 97% (Scotland) and 81 to 98% (England). The reply addressed the reason for referral in 94-100% of cases (Scotland) and 93-97% (England) and was meaningful in 95-100% (Scotland) and 94-99% (England). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the interdisciplinary joint statement on sharing patient information, this audit highlights variable standard of referrals and deficits in replies to the referring COs, with one exception in Scotland. Replies from HES to COs are important for patient care, benefitting patients and clinicians and minimising unnecessary HES appointments.

Design and use of vignettes to investigate referral decision-making by optometrists

Purpose: This study describes the design and application of a range of online clinical vignettes for measuring the impact of Continuing Education and Training (CET) and identifying unwarranted variation in optometric decision-making concerning referrals to secondary care.MethodsTwenty computerised vignettes were developed to assess clinical and referral management decisions taken in primary care optometry. The online system was specifically designed to present vignettes (ten pre-CET and ten post-CET) that avoided prompting correct answers. The main study group was qualified optometrists (N = 31) who chose any CET options available to United Kingdom optometrists over six months. Participants submitted a record of the CET undertaken, which was compared with an anonymised General Optical Council (GOC) reference sample. The vignettes were also completed by newly-qualified (N = 18) and pre-registration (N = 11) groups.ResultsCET had no significant correlation (p = 0.37) with improvement in optometric clinical decision-making and referral practice (qualified group). Selection bias affected this group who had more CET points (p = 0.008) and peer discussion points (p = 0.003) than the GOC reference sample. Results were indicative due to small sample sizes. Newly-qualified practitioners were significantly more likely to refer than the qualified group (p = 0.004). Number of referrals decreased with time since qualification (p = 0.006). (AU)

Design and use of vignettes to investigate referral decision-making by optometrists.

PURPOSE: This study describes the design and application of a range of online clinical vignettes for measuring the impact of Continuing Education and Training (CET) and identifying unwarranted variation in optometric decision-making concerning referrals to secondary care. METHODS: Twenty computerised vignettes were developed to assess clinical and referral management decisions taken in primary care optometry. The online system was specifically designed to present vignettes (ten pre-CET and ten post-CET) that avoided prompting correct answers. The main study group was qualified optometrists (N = 31) who chose any CET options available to United Kingdom optometrists over six months. Participants submitted a record of the CET undertaken, which was compared with an anonymised General Optical Council (GOC) reference sample. The vignettes were also completed by newly-qualified (N = 18) and pre-registration (N = 11) groups. RESULTS: CET had no significant correlation (p = 0.37) with improvement in optometric clinical decision-making and referral practice (qualified group). Selection bias affected this group who had more CET points (p = 0.008) and peer discussion points (p = 0.003) than the GOC reference sample. Results were indicative due to small sample sizes. Newly-qualified practitioners were significantly more likely to refer than the qualified group (p = 0.004). Number of referrals decreased with time since qualification (p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Computerised vignettes are a useful tool for comparing referral decisions between groups. Recruiting clinicians for time-consuming vignette studies is challenging. Strategies to reduce unwarranted variation in optometry, including support for newly-qualified optometrists, require further investigation.

Acceptability of a home-based visual field test (Eyecatcher) for glaucoma home monitoring: a qualitative study of patients' views and experiences.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the acceptability of home visual field (VF) testing using Eyecatcher among people with glaucoma participating in a 6-month home monitoring pilot study. DESIGN: Qualitative study using face-to-face semistructured interviews. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. SETTING: Participants were recruited in the UK through an advertisement in the International Glaucoma Association (now Glaucoma UK) newsletter. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty adults (10 women; median age: 71 years) with a diagnosis of glaucoma were recruited (including open angle and normal tension glaucoma; mean deviation=2.5 to -29.9 dB). RESULTS: All participants could successfully perform VF testing at home. Interview data were coded into four overarching themes regarding experiences of undertaking VF home monitoring and attitudes towards its wider implementation in healthcare: (1) comparisons between Eyecatcher and Humphrey Field Analyser (HFA); (2) capability using Eyecatcher; (3) practicalities for effective wider scale implementation; (4) motivations for home monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: Participants identified a broad range of benefits to VF home monitoring and discussed areas for service improvement. Eyecatcher was compared positively with conventional VF testing using HFA. Home monitoring may be acceptable to at least a subset of people with glaucoma.

Investigation of the efficacy of an online tool for improving the diagnosis of macular lesions imaged by optical coherence tomography

Purpose: Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a non-invasive method for diagnosis and monitoring of retinal (typically, macular) conditions. The unfamiliar nature of OCT images can present considerable challenges for some community optometrists.The purpose of this research is to develop and assess the efficacy of a novel internet resource designed to assist optometrists in using OCT for diagnosis of macular disease and patient management.MethodsAn online tool (OCTAID) has been designed to assist practitioners in the diagnosis of macular lesions detected by OCT. The effectiveness of OCTAID was evaluated in a randomised controlled trial comparing two groups of practitioners who underwent an online assessment (using clinical vignettes) based on OCT images, before (exam 1) and after (exam 2) an educational intervention. Participants’ answers were validated against experts’ classifications (the reference standard). OCTAID was randomly allocated as the educational intervention for one group with the control group receiving an intervention of standard OCT educational material. The participants were community optometrists.ResultsRandom allocation resulted in 53 optometrists receiving OCTAID and 65 receiving the control intervention. Both groups performed similarly at baseline with no significant difference in mean exam 1 scores (p = 0.21). The primary outcome measure was mean improvement in exam score between the two exam modules. Participants who received OCTAID improved their exam score significantly more than those who received conventional educational materials (p = 0.005).ConclusionUse of OCTAID is associated with an improvement in the combined skill of OCT scan recognition and patient management decisions. (AU)

Inter-optometrist variability of IOP measurement for modern tonometers and their agreement with Goldmann Applanation Tonometry.

Clinical relevance: Accuracy of tonometers is of vital importance in the detection and treatment of glaucoma.Background: This study investigates: agreement in intraocular pressure measurements between three tonometers and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT); inter-optometrist agreement for each tonometer; intra-optometrist agreement for GAT; association between central corneal thickness (CCT) and IOP measurements with each tonometer.Methods: IOP was measured using: CT-1P Non-Contact Tonometer (NCT) (Topcon Corporation, Tokyo, Japan), Pulsair IntelliPuff (Keeler Ltd., Windsor, UK) and Icare rebound tonometer (Icare, Helsinki, Finland) by two optometrists in a random order. Two GAT readings were obtained by each optometrist in a randomised masked manner. Mean differences, and 95% limits of agreement (LoA) for each measurement were calculated. CCT was measured by CT-1P pachymeter.Results: Forty-one participants' IOPs were measured. Mean differences (95% LoA) between NCT, Pulsair, Icare compared to GAT for one optometrist were: 0.8 (-5.4 to 6.9) mmHg, -1.7 (-8.2 to 4.8) mmHg, -1.6 (-9.0 to 5.9) mmHg. Mean differences (95% LoA) in inter-optometrist agreement for GAT, NCT, Pulsair and Icare were: 0.3 (-6.7 to 7.3) mmHg, 0.4 (-2.1 to 2.9) mmHg, -0.9 (-3.6 to 1.9) mmHg and -0.2 (-4.9 to 4.5) mmHg, respectively. Mean differences (95% LoA) for intra-optometrist agreement for GAT were 0.2 (4.3 to -4.7) mmHg and 0.1 (3.6 to -3.9) mmHg for each optometrist, respectively. There was a weak positive association between CCT and both GAT (r2 = 0.11) and NCT (r2 = 0.12).Conclusion: Pulsair and Icare may measure IOP lower than GAT. Mean differences for inter-optometrist agreement for all tonometers were < 1 mmHg; Pulsair showed a statistically significant difference. Intra-optometrist agreement for GAT was good. IOP measurements taken by two community optometrists are comparable using tonometers used in community practice.

Use of standardised patients in optometry training.

Clinical relevance: The ability to articulate clinical findings to patients through effective communication is a key skill in all health-care professions.Background: Unannounced standardised patients (SPs) are successful in measuring quality of clinical care provided by qualified optometrists but have not been used in optometry training. Final-year undergraduate optometry students examine members of the public during primary care clinics observed by visiting clinical tutors (VCTs) who provide individualised feedback, highlighting areas for improvement. This pilot study investigates whether unannounced SPs can be used as an additional resource providing enhanced feedback on communication skills in undergraduate optometry education.Methods: Two SPs received intensive training on reporting on students eye examinations and communication skills through completion of pre-designed checklists for each patient encounter. Each SP presented 16 times as an unannounced patient for routine eye examinations. SPs' comments on communication skills of 32 students during 32 examinations was compared to feedback from 10 VCTs. SPs' performance was monitored to ensure consistency. Evaluation of differences in quality and quantity of feedback provided by SPs and VCTs was performed using thematic analysis and chi-squared tests. Student feedback on the use of SPs was obtained on completion of the study.Results: Qualitative thematic analysis revealed six overarching themes emerging from 64 sets of feedback. SPs gave significantly more feedback, both positive comments and comments with recommendations, than VCTs for the (a) total number of comments for each theme (p = 0.0000) and (b) detail and depth of these comments. Students reported that SPs commented on aspects of communication (e.g., establishing rapport and body language) not noted by VCTs.Conclusions: Unannounced SPs can provide enhanced feedback on communication skills to final-year undergraduate optometry students. Students greatly valued VCTs feedback; however, they felt SPs commented on elements of communication not noted by VCTs.

Glaucoma Home Monitoring Using a Tablet-Based Visual Field Test (Eyecatcher): An Assessment of Accuracy and Adherence Over 6 Months.

PURPOSE: To assess accuracy and adherence of visual field (VF) home monitoring in a pilot sample of patients with glaucoma. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal feasibility and reliability study. METHODS: Twenty adults (median 71 years) with an established diagnosis of glaucoma were issued a tablet perimeter (Eyecatcher) and were asked to perform 1 VF home assessment per eye, per month, for 6 months (12 tests total). Before and after home monitoring, 2 VF assessments were performed in clinic using standard automated perimetry (4 tests total, per eye). RESULTS: All 20 participants could perform monthly home monitoring, though 1 participant stopped after 4 months (adherence: 98% of tests). There was good concordance between VFs measured at home and in the clinic (r = 0.94, P < .001). In 21 of 236 tests (9%), mean deviation deviated by more than ±3 dB from the median. Many of these anomalous tests could be identified by applying machine learning techniques to recordings from the tablets' front-facing camera (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.78). Adding home-monitoring data to 2 standard automated perimetry tests made 6 months apart reduced measurement error (between-test measurement variability) in 97% of eyes, with mean absolute error more than halving in 90% of eyes. Median test duration was 4.5 minutes (quartiles: 3.9-5.2 minutes). Substantial variations in ambient illumination had no observable effect on VF measurements (r = 0.07, P = .320). CONCLUSIONS: Home monitoring of VFs is viable for some patients and may provide clinically useful data.

Investigation of the efficacy of an online tool for improving the diagnosis of macular lesions imaged by optical coherence tomography.

PURPOSE: Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a non-invasive method for diagnosis and monitoring of retinal (typically, macular) conditions. The unfamiliar nature of OCT images can present considerable challenges for some community optometrists. The purpose of this research is to develop and assess the efficacy of a novel internet resource designed to assist optometrists in using OCT for diagnosis of macular disease and patient management. METHODS: An online tool (OCTAID) has been designed to assist practitioners in the diagnosis of macular lesions detected by OCT. The effectiveness of OCTAID was evaluated in a randomised controlled trial comparing two groups of practitioners who underwent an online assessment (using clinical vignettes) based on OCT images, before (exam 1) and after (exam 2) an educational intervention. Participants' answers were validated against experts' classifications (the reference standard). OCTAID was randomly allocated as the educational intervention for one group with the control group receiving an intervention of standard OCT educational material. The participants were community optometrists. RESULTS: Random allocation resulted in 53 optometrists receiving OCTAID and 65 receiving the control intervention. Both groups performed similarly at baseline with no significant difference in mean exam 1 scores (p = 0.21). The primary outcome measure was mean improvement in exam score between the two exam modules. Participants who received OCTAID improved their exam score significantly more than those who received conventional educational materials (p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Use of OCTAID is associated with an improvement in the combined skill of OCT scan recognition and patient management decisions.

Referrals from community optometrists to the hospital eye service in England.

PURPOSE: In the UK, most referrals to the hospital eye service (HES) originate from community optometrists (CO). This audit investigates the quality of referrals, replies, and communication between CO and the HES. METHODS: Optometric referrals and replies were extracted from three practices in England. If no reply letter was found, the records were searched at each local HES unit, and additional replies or records copied. De-identified referrals, replies and records were audited by a panel against established standards to evaluate whether the referrals were necessary, accurate and directed to the appropriate professional. The referral rate (RR) and referral reply rate (RRR) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 459 de-identified referrals were extracted. The RR ranged from 3.6%-8.7%. The proportion of referred patients who were seen in the HES unit was 63%-76%. From the CO perspective, the proportion of referrals for which they received replies ranged from 26%-49%. Adjusting the number of referrals for cases when it would be reasonable to expect an HES reply, RRR becomes 38%-62%. Patients received a copy of the reply in 3%-21% of cases. Referrals were made to the appropriate service in over 95% of cases, were judged necessary in 93%-97% and were accurate in 81%-98% of cases. The referral reply addressed the reason for the referral in 93%-97% and was meaningful in 94%-99% of cases. The most common conditions referred were glaucoma, cataract, anterior segment lesions, and neurological/ocular motor anomalies. The CO/HES dyad (pairing) in the area with the lowest average household income had the highest RR. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast with the Royal College of Ophthalmologists/College of Optometrists joint statement on sharing patient information, CO referrals often do not elicit a reply to the referring CO. Replies from the HES to COs are important for patient care, benefitting patients and clinicians, and minimising unnecessary HES appointments.

The Human Touch: Using a Webcam to Autonomously Monitor Compliance During Visual Field Assessments.

Purpose: To explore the feasibility of using various easy-to-obtain biomarkers to monitor non-compliance (measurement error) during visual field assessments. Methods: Forty-two healthy adults (42 eyes) and seven glaucoma patients (14 eyes) underwent two same-day visual field assessments. An ordinary webcam was used to compute seven potential biomarkers of task compliance, based primarily on eye gaze, head pose, and facial expression. We quantified the association between each biomarker and measurement error, as defined by (1) test-retest differences in overall test scores (mean sensitivity), and (2) failures to respond to visible stimuli on individual trials (stimuli -3 dB or more brighter than threshold). Results: In healthy eyes, three of the seven biomarkers were significantly associated with overall (test-retest) measurement error (P = 0.003-0.007), and at least two others exhibited possible trends (P = 0.052-0.060). The weighted linear sum of all seven biomarkers was associated with overall measurement error, in both healthy eyes (r = 0.51, P < 0.001) and patients (r = 0.65, P < 0.001). Five biomarkers were each associated with failures to respond to visible stimuli on individual trials (all P < 0.001). Conclusions: Inexpensive, autonomous measures of task compliance are associated with measurement error in visual field assessments, in terms of both the overall reliability of a test and failures to respond on particular trials ("lapses"). This could be helpful for identifying low-quality assessments and for improving assessment techniques (e.g., by discounting suspect responses or by automatically triggering comfort breaks or encouragement). Translational Relevance: This study explores a potential way of improving the reliability of visual field assessments, a crucial but notoriously unreliable clinical measure.

Sources of error in clinical measurement of the amplitude of accommodation / Fuentes de error en la medición clínica de la amplitud de acomodación

Measurement of the amplitude of accommodation is established as a procedure in a routine optometric eye examination. However, clinical methods of measurement of this basic optical function have several sources of error. They are numerous and diverse, and include depth of focus, reaction time, instrument design, specification of the measurement end-point, specification of the reference point of measurement, measurement conditions, consideration of refractive error, and psychological factors. Several of these sources of inaccuracy are composed of multiple sub-sources, and many of the sub-sources influence the common methods of measurement of amplitude of accommodation. Consideration of these sources of measurement error casts doubt on the reliability of the results of measurement, on the validity of established normative values that have been produced using these methods, and on the value of reports of the results of surgery designed to restore accommodation. Clinicians can reduce the effects of some of the sources of error by modifying techniques of measurement with existing methods, but a new method may further improve accuracy

La medición de la amplitud de acomodación se ha establecido como un procedimiento del examen optométrico ocular rutinario. Sin embargo, los métodos clínicos de medición de esta función óptica básica tienen diversas fuentes de error. Estas son numerosas y diversas, e incluyen profundidad de foco, tiempo de reacción, diseño del instrumento, especificación del punto final de la medición, especificación del punto de referencia de la medición, condiciones de la medición, consideración del error refractivo, y factores psicológicos. Algunas de estas fuentes de imprecisión se componen de múltiples sub-fuentes, muchas de las cuales influyen en los métodos comunes de medición de la amplitud de acomodación. La consideración de estas fuentes de error en la medición plantea dudas sobre la fiabilidad de los resultados de dicha medición, la validez de los valores normativos establecidos que se han producido utilizando estos métodos, y el valor de los informes sobre resultados de la cirugía diseñada para restablecer la acomodación. Los clínicos pueden reducir los efectos de algunas de las fuentes de error, modificando las técnicas de medición con ayuda de los métodos existentes, aunque el desarrollo de un nuevo método podría mejorar la precisión

Sources of error in clinical measurement of the amplitude of accommodation.

Measurement of the amplitude of accommodation is established as a procedure in a routine optometric eye examination. However, clinical methods of measurement of this basic optical function have several sources of error. They are numerous and diverse, and include depth of focus, reaction time, instrument design, specification of the measurement end-point, specification of the reference point of measurement, measurement conditions, consideration of refractive error, and psychological factors. Several of these sources of inaccuracy are composed of multiple sub-sources, and many of the sub-sources influence the common methods of measurement of amplitude of accommodation. Consideration of these sources of measurement error casts doubt on the reliability of the results of measurement, on the validity of established normative values that have been produced using these methods, and on the value of reports of the results of surgery designed to restore accommodation. Clinicians can reduce the effects of some of the sources of error by modifying techniques of measurement with existing methods, but a new method may further improve accuracy.

Impact of the Manchester Glaucoma Enhanced Referral Scheme on NHS costs.

OBJECTIVES: Glaucoma filtering schemes such as the Manchester Glaucoma Enhanced Referral Scheme (GERS) aim to reduce the number of false positive cases referred to Hospital Eye Services. Such schemes can also have wider system benefits, as they may reduce waiting times for other patients. However, previous studies of the cost consequences and wider system benefits of glaucoma filtering schemes are inconclusive. We investigate the cost consequences of the Manchester GERS. DESIGN: Observational study. METHODS: A cost analysis from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) was conducted using audit data from the Manchester GERS. RESULTS: 2405 patients passed through the Manchester GERS from April 2013 to November 2016. 53.3% were not referred on to Manchester Royal Eye Hospital (MREH). Assuming an average of 2.3 outpatient visits to MREH were avoided for each filtered patient, the scheme saved the NHS approximately £2.76 per patient passing through the scheme. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that glaucoma filtering schemes have the potential to reduce false positive referrals and costs to the NHS.