Evaluating Adherence to Diabetic Retinopathy Care in an Urban Ophthalmology Clinic Utilizing the Compliance With Annual Diabetic Eye Exams Survey.

Introduction The objective of this study was to identify barriers that affect adherence to the management of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in an urban ophthalmology clinic. Patient beliefs regarding diabetic eye care, transportation to the eye clinic, the COVID-19 pandemic, and treatment with panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) or anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections were investigated. Materials and methods The original Compliance with Annual Diabetic Eye Exams Survey (CADEES) included 44 statements designed with a 5-point Likert scale to assess patients' beliefs and understanding of their eye health and the importance of diabetic eye examinations. This survey was modified to include additional statements regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and free-response questions about transportation barriers and patients' subjective experiences with PRP or anti-VEGF injections. A total of 365 patients with a diagnosis of any stage of DR from SLUCare Ophthalmology were identified as potential participants to complete the telephone survey. Patients were classified as non-adherent if they did not have a dilated eye examination within the past year, missed a scheduled follow-up appointment for DR care within the past year, or missed an appointment for anti-VEGF injections or PRP. The mean Likert scores for each CADEES statement were compared between the adherent and non-adherent groups using independent samples t-tests. Demographics and clinical indicators were also reported and compared between the two groups. Results Out of 365 patients, 68 completed the modified CADEES. Twenty-nine patients were adherent, and 39 patients were non-adherent. Results from six of the 54 CADEES statements were significantly different between the adherent and non-adherent groups. These statements addressed patients' perception of their eye health, self-confidence in making an eye appointment, knowing someone with diabetic eye complications, self-confidence in controlling blood sugar, ability to use public transportation during the COVID-19 pandemic, and prioritizing eye health during the pandemic. There were no significant differences in clinical indicators or demographics between the adherent and non-adherent groups. Of the participants, 39.7% offered reasons for why transportation to the eye clinic was difficult. Patients suggested three novel reasons for missing eye appointments that were not specifically addressed in the CADEES. Fourteen unique barriers were reported for non-adherence with PRP or anti-VEGF injections. Conclusions The CADEES is a thorough tool for evaluating social barriers impacting adherence with DR appointments in an urban ophthalmology clinic. The survey did not identify any clinical or demographic risk factors for non-adherence in this patient population. Decreased patient self-efficacy may lead to non-adherence with the management of DR. The COVID-19 pandemic impacted the adherence of a small percentage of patients.

Accuracy of International Classification of Diseases Codes for Identifying Acute Optic Neuritis.

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes for identifying cases of acute optic neuritis (aON) is not known. A prior study reported 61% accuracy for ICD code plus MRI consistent with aON within 2 months. This study determined accuracy for ICD code plus MRI within 2 months regardless of results. METHODS: Retrospective chart review was conducted using a medical record research repository of a tertiary care institution from 1998 to 2019. Subjects with ICD-9/10 codes for ON and an MRI brain and/or orbits within 2 months of earliest (initial) ICD code were included. MRI was classified as positive or negative for aON based on report noting gadolinium-contrast enhancement. Clinical diagnosis at the time of initial code was classified as aON, prior ON, considered ON, alternative diagnosis, or unknown based on review of physician authored clinical notes within 7 days of the initial code. Accuracy of ICD code for aON, acute or prior ON, and acute, prior, or considered ON were calculated for all subjects and stratified based on MRI result. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-one subjects had MRI results within 2 months of their initial ON ICD code (49 positive MRI [previously reported]; 202 negative MRI). Among those with negative MRI, 32 (16%) had aON, 40 (20%) had prior ON, 19 (9%) considered ON as a diagnosis, 92 (46%) had other confirmed diagnoses, and 19 (9%) had unknown diagnosis at time of code. Considering all subjects, accuracy for ICD code was 25% for acute ON, 41% for acute or prior ON, and 48% for acute, prior, or considered ON. Positive MRI, increased number of ON ICD codes, a code given by an ophthalmologist or neurologist within 2 months, and the presence of a neurology encounter within 2 months were associated with an increased accuracy for clinical aON diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of an MRI within 2 months, ICD codes for ON have low accuracy for acute ON and only slightly better accuracy for acute or prior ON. Accuracy is higher for cases with a positive MRI than those with a negative MRI, suggesting positive MRI in conjunction with ICD codes may help more accurately identify cases. Reliance on ICD and Current Procedural Terminology codes alone to identify aON cases may introduce substantial misclassification bias in claims-based research.

Diagnostic Error in Neuro-ophthalmology: Avenues to Improve.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To highlight potential avenues to reduce preventable diagnostic error of neuro-ophthalmic conditions and avoid patient harm. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent prospective studies and studies of patient harm have advanced our understanding. Additionally, recent studies of fundus photography, telemedicine, and artificial intelligence highlight potential avenues for diagnostic improvement. Diagnostic error of neuro-ophthalmic conditions can often be traced to failure to gather an adequate history, perform a complete physical exam, obtain adequate/appropriate neuroimaging, and generate a complete, appropriate differential diagnosis. Improving triage and identification of neuro-ophthalmic conditions by other providers and increasing access to subspecialty neuro-ophthalmology evaluation are essential avenues to reduce diagnostic error. Further research should evaluate the relationship between misdiagnosis and patient harm, and help identify the most impactful potential targets for improvement.

Factors Associated With Increased Emergency Department Utilization in Patients With Acute Optic Neuritis.

BACKGROUND: Symptoms of acute vision loss and eye pain may lead patients with optic neuritis to seek care in the emergency department (ED). Given the availability of lower cost alternatives for providing medical care for optic neuritis, this study aimed to identify factors associated with higher ED utilization. METHODS: Subjects with acute optic neuritis were identified through a chart review of adults with International Classification of Diseases-9 (ICD-9) or ICD-10 codes for optic neuritis with corresponding gadolinium contrast enhancement of the optic nerve on MRI in the medical record research repository of a tertiary care institution. Subjects were grouped based on the number of ED visits (0-1 and 2-3) within 2 months of either ICD code or MRI. Demographics, characteristics of disease presentation, type and location of medical care, testing (chest imaging, lumbar puncture, optical coherence tomography, spine MRI, visual field, and laboratory tests), treatment, provider specialty of follow-up visits, and duration of care were extracted from the medical record. RESULTS: Of 30 acute optic neuritis subjects (age 41 ± 16 years, range 18-76, 53% [16/30] female), 19 had 0-1 ED visit and 11 had 2-3 ED visits. Most subjects were Caucasian, non-Hispanic (47%), followed by Asian (23%), Hispanic/Latino (17%), Black (10%), and others (3%). Subjects had an initial clinical encounter primarily in the outpatient setting (63%) as compared with the ED (37%). The median time from symptom onset to initial clinical encounter was 4 days with a range of 0-13. Subjects were mostly insured through a private insurance (60%), followed by Medicare/Medicaid (23%) and uninsured (17%). Fewer ED visits were associated with an initial clinical encounter in an outpatient setting (P = 0.02, chi-square), but not residential distance from the hospital or insurance type. Subjects with a higher number of ED visits were more likely to be of Hispanic/Latino ethnicity (P = 0.047, Fisher exact). There was no significant difference in the ophthalmic, radiologic, or laboratory testing performed in both groups. Both groups presented in a similar time frame with similar symptoms and clinical signs. Treatment was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Subjects with their first clinical encounter for optic neuritis in the ED had more visits to the ED overall when compared with those first seen in an outpatient setting and thus strategies aimed at facilitating outpatient care may help reduce unnecessary ED visits, although some, such as insurance status, may be difficult to modify. Further study in a larger sample is needed to refine these observations.