ABSTRACT
Global eye health is defined as the degree to which vision, ocular health, and function are maximised worldwide, thereby optimising overall wellbeing and quality of life. Improving eye health is a global priority as a key to unlocking human potential by reducing the morbidity burden of disease, increasing productivity, and supporting access to education. Although extraordinary progress fuelled by global eye health initiatives has been made over the last decade, there remain substantial challenges impeding further progress. The accelerated development of digital health and artificial intelligence (AI) applications provides an opportunity to transform eye health, from facilitating and increasing access to eye care to supporting clinical decision making with an objective, data-driven approach. Here, we explore the opportunities and challenges presented by digital health and AI in global eye health and describe how these technologies could be leveraged to improve global eye health. AI, telehealth, and emerging technologies have great potential, but require specific work to overcome barriers to implementation. We suggest that a global digital eye health task force could facilitate coordination of funding, infrastructural development, and democratisation of AI and digital health to drive progress forwards in this domain.
Subject(s)
Artificial Intelligence , Quality of Life , Humans , Advisory Committees , Clinical Decision-Making , Educational StatusABSTRACT
PURPOSE: A survey aimed to capture the caregiver's perspective on the impact of amblyopia and its treatment on the child and family, as well as caregivers' views on the design and feasibility of clinical trials investigating dichoptic binocular therapies for amblyopia. METHODS: Parents of amblyopic children, patient advocates and healthcare professionals took part in a moderated, structured discussion on a novel virtual advisory-board platform. RESULTS: Seven parents of children with amblyopia, two patient organisation representatives, one ophthalmologist and one optometrist participated in the survey. A total of 645 posts were entered on the platform over a 14-day period in September 2021. There was widespread agreement that the management of amblyopia poses more of a burden on the child and family than the condition itself, with treatment burden accentuated when treatment is unsuccessful. Parents expressed uncertainty and frustration in relation to the duration of patching, success of patching and alternative treatment options, and felt there was inadequate readily available, easy-to-understand information on the condition. Parents reported that a new treatment for amblyopia, such as dichoptic binocular therapy using video games, should be safe, non-invasive and engaging compared with an eye patch. Treating at home, potentially for a shorter treatment duration, and with an entertaining game were the main reasons parents would join a clinical study with this type of novel therapy. However, due to a limited critical period treatment window, parents would feel more comfortable joining a clinical trial if traditional therapies were offered in conjunction with those under investigation. CONCLUSION: Patient perspectives and the role of caregivers in the acceptance of any interventional treatments are increasingly recognised. Understanding how amblyopia and its treatment impacts a child and family should be an important premise to guide therapy and evaluate treatment value, both in clinical trials and in routine medical practice.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: In its recent World Report on Vision, the WHO called for an updated approach to monitor eye health as part of universal health coverage (UHC). This project sought to develop a consensus among eye health experts from all world regions to produce a menu of indicators for countries to monitor eye health within UHC. METHODS: We reviewed the literature to create a long-list of indicators aligned to the conceptual framework for monitoring outlined in WHO's World Report on Vision. We recruited a panel of 72 global eye health experts (40% women) to participate in a two-round, online prioritisation exercise. Two-hundred indicators were presented in Round 1 and participants prioritised each on a 4-point Likert scale. The highest-ranked 95 were presented in Round 2 and were (1) scored against four criteria (feasible, actionable, reliable and internationally comparable) and (2) ranked according to their suitability as a 'core' indicator for collection by all countries. The top 30 indicators ranked by these two parameters were then used as the basis for the steering group to develop a final menu. RESULTS: The menu consists of 22 indicators, including 7 core indicators, that represent important concepts in eye health for 2020 and beyond, and are considered feasible, actionable, reliable and internationally comparable. CONCLUSION: We believe this list can inform the development of new national eye health monitoring frameworks, monitor progress on key challenges to eye health and be considered in broader UHC monitoring indices at national and international levels.
