Web-based Telemonitoring of Visual Function and Self-reported Postoperative Outcomes in Cataract Care: an International Multicenter RCT.

PURPOSE: Comparing web-based, self-administered follow-up after cataract surgery to conventional face-to-face follow-up. SETTING: Eye clinics in the Netherlands, Austria and Germany. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial with an embedded method comparison study [ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04809402]. METHODS: Routine cataract patients were randomized into two groups: the 'telemonitoring' group undertook web-based vision self-assessments and questionnaires from home, while the 'usual care' group received conventional care. All participants had a 4-6 week post-surgery clinic visit for safety and validation purposes. Outcomes included: the web-test's accuracy for assessing postoperative visual acuity (VA) and refractive error; adverse event rates; and patient reported outcome measurements (PROMs). RESULTS: 94 participants (188 eyes) were enrolled. Web-based uncorrected distance VA testing demonstrated a negligible mean difference (-0.03±0.14 logMAR) when compared to conventional ETDRS chart testing, with 95% limits-of-agreement ranging from -0.30 to 0.24 logMAR. The web-based refraction assessment overestimated the postoperative refractive error (mean difference 0.15±0.67 diopters), resulting in a poorer corrected distance VA compared to subjective refraction (mean 0.1 vs. -0.1 logMAR). Rates of adverse events and unscheduled consultations were minimal across both groups. Preoperative and postoperative PROMs questionnaires had a 100% response rate. Visual functioning (Catquest-9SF and NEI-VFQ-25) improved after surgery (mean improvement -0.80 and 16.70 respectively) and did not significantly differ between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The cataract patients in this study effectively provided postoperative outcome data via a web-interface. Both conventional and web-based follow-ups yielded similar PROMs and adverse event rates. Future developments should reduce the variability in the web-based VA test and yield representative refraction outcomes.

The TeleTriageTeam, Offering Continuity of Personalized Care Through Telemedicine: Development and Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic taught us how to rethink care delivery. It catalyzed creative solutions to amplify the potential of personnel and facilities. This paper presents and evaluates a promptly introduced triaging solution that evolved into a tool to tackle the ever-growing waiting lists at an academic ophthalmology department, the TeleTriageTeam (TTT). A team of undergraduate optometry students, tutor optometrists, and ophthalmologists collaborate to maintain continuity of eye care. In this ongoing project, we combine innovative interprofessional task allocation, teaching, and remote care delivery. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we described a novel approach, the TTT; reported its clinical effectiveness and impact on waiting lists; and discussed its transformation to a sustainable method for delivering remote eye care. METHODS: Real-world clinical data of all patients assessed by the TTT between April 16, 2020, and December 31, 2021, are covered in this paper. Business data on waiting lists and patient portal access were collected from the capacity management team and IT department of our hospital. Interim analyses were performed at different time points during the project, and this study presents a synthesis of these analyses. RESULTS: A total of 3658 cases were assessed by the TTT. For approximately half (1789/3658, 48.91%) of the assessed cases, an alternative to a conventional face-to-face consultation was found. The waiting lists that had built up during the first months of the pandemic diminished and have been stable since the end of 2020, even during periods of imposed lockdown restrictions and reduced capacity. Patient portal access decreased with age, and patients who were invited to perform a remote, web-based eye test at home were on average younger than patients who were not invited. CONCLUSIONS: Our promptly introduced approach to remotely review cases and prioritize urgency has been successful in maintaining continuity of care and education throughout the pandemic and has evolved into a telemedicine service that is of great interest for future purposes, especially in the routine follow-up of patients with chronic diseases. TTT appears to be a potentially preferred practice in other clinics and medical specialties. The paradox is that judicious clinical decision-making based on remotely collected data is possible, only if we as caregivers are willing to change our routines and cognitions regarding face-to-face care delivery.

Introducing e-health technology to routine cataract care: patient perspectives on web-based eye test for postoperative telemonitoring.

PURPOSE: To explore cataract patients' experiences with an e-health tool for self-assessing visual function (ie, a web-based eye test), and to formulate recommendations for its successful adoption in routine cataract care. SETTING: Clinics in the Netherlands, Germany, and Austria. DESIGN: Mixed-methods study. METHODS: 22 participants were included in this study; in-depth interviews were conducted with 12. Questionnaires and in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted alongside a multicenter randomized controlled trial evaluating the validity, safety and cost-effectiveness of remote care after cataract surgery (Cataract Online Refraction Evaluation, a Randomized Controlled Trial). Results were analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Participants reported positively about performing the web-based eye test at home. 4 overarching themes were identified in the interviews. First, participants were inventive in overcoming practical barriers encountered while conducting the test. Second, participants desired a clear presentation of test results and their meaning. Third, the ability to self-monitor visual function was appreciated. Fourth, most participants preferred to keep the option to contact their eyecare professional (ECP) postoperatively, especially when experiencing symptoms. Most would be satisfied with a phone consultation or an e-consult. Participants reported positive experiences with the web-based eye test. Barriers for successful adoption were identified, including insecurity about correctly performing the test, incomplete information on how to interpret test results, and a feeling that in-hospital assessments were superior to remote assessments. CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended to focus on building trust in remote eyecare delivery and that access to the ECP be retained when medically indicated or deemed necessary by the patient.

Evaluation of a visual acuity eHealth tool in patients with cataract.

PURPOSE: To validate the Easee web-based tool for the assessment of visual acuity in patients who underwent cataract surgery. SETTING: University Eye Clinic Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands. DESIGN: Prospective method comparison study. METHODS: Subjects aged between 18 and 69 years who underwent cataract surgery on 1 or both eyes at the Maastricht University Medical Center+ were eligible to participate in this study. The uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) assessments were performed using the web-based tool (index test) and conventional ETDRS and Snellen charts (reference tests). The outcomes of the different tests were expressed in logMAR, and a difference of <0.15 logMAR was considered clinically acceptable. RESULTS: 46 subjects with 75 operated eyes were included in this study. The difference of the UDVA between the web-based tool and ETDRS or Snellen was -0.05 ± 0.10 logMAR ( P < .001 [0.15; -0.26]) and -0.04 ± 0.15 logMAR ( P = .018 [0.24; -0.33]), respectively. For the CDVA, these differences were -0.04 ± 0.08 logMAR ( P < .001 [0.13; -0.21]) and -0.07 ± 0.10 logMAR ( P < .001 [0.13; -0.27]), respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficients between the web-based tool and ETDRS were maximally 0.94 and compared with Snellen 0.92. In total, 73% to 88% of the visual acuity measurement differences were within 0.15 logMAR. CONCLUSIONS: The web-based tool was validated for the assessment of visual acuity in patients who underwent cataract surgery and showed clinically acceptable outcomes in up to 88% of patients. Most of the participants had a positive attitude toward the web-based tool, which requires basic digital skills.

Remote follow-up after cataract surgery (CORE-RCT): study protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cataract surgery has become one of the most performed surgical procedures worldwide. Postoperative management consists of routine clinical examinations to assess post-operative visual function and detect possible adverse events. Due to the low incidence of complications, the majority of clinic visits after cataract surgery are uneventful. Nonetheless, valuable time and hospital resources are consumed. We hypothesize that remote post-operative follow-up involving teleconsultations and self-assessments of visual function and health status, could be a valid alternative to face-to-face clinical examinations in selected patient groups. The practice of remote follow-up after cataract surgery has not yet been evaluated. The aim of this study is to investigate the validity, safety and cost-effectiveness of remote cataract surgery follow-up, and to report on the patients' experiences with remotely self-assessing visual function. METHODS: This study is a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial. Patients planned for cataract surgery on both eyes, without ocular comorbidities, are eligible for participation. Participants will be allocated (1:1) into one of the two study groups: 'telemonitoring' or 'usual care'. Participants in the 'telemonitoring' group will perform in-home assessments after cataract surgery (remote web-based eye exams and digital questionnaires on their own devices). Participants in the 'usual care' group will have regular post-operative consultations, according to the study site's regular practice. Outcome measures include accuracy of the web-based eye exam for assessing visual acuity and refraction, patient-reported outcome measures (visual function and quality of life), adverse events, and cost aspects. DISCUSSION: Investigating remote follow-up after cataract surgery fits the current trends of digitization of health care. We believe that remote self-care can be a promising avenue to comply with the increasing demands of cataract care. This randomized controlled trial provides scientific evidence on this unmet need and delivers the desired insights on (cost)effectiveness of remote follow-up after cataract surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04809402. Date of registration: March 22, 2021.

The Accuracy of a Web-Based Visual Acuity Self-assessment Tool Performed Independently by Eye Care Patients at Home: Method Comparison Study.

BACKGROUND:  Telehealth solutions can play an important role in increasing access to eye care. Web-based eye tests can enable individuals to self-assess their visual function remotely without the assistance of an eye care professional. A web-based tool for self-assessing visual acuity (VA) has previously been studied in controlled, supervised conditions. The accuracy of this tool when performed independently by patients in their home environment, using their own devices, has not yet been examined. OBJECTIVE:  The objective of this paper was to examine the accuracy of a web-based tool with respect to measuring VA in ophthalmic patients in their home environment, compared with a conventional in-hospital assessment using a Snellen chart (the gold standard). METHODS:  From April through September 2020, consecutive adult patients with uveitis at the University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands, performed the web-based VA test at home (the index test) before their upcoming conventional VA assessment at the hospital (the reference test). The agreement between the 2 tests was assessed by the Bland-Altman analysis. Additional analyses were performed to investigate associations between clinical characteristics and the accuracy of the web-based test. RESULTS:  A total of 98 eyes in 59 patients were included in the study. The difference in VA between the index and reference tests was not significant, with a mean difference of 0.02 (SD 0.12) logMAR (P=.09) and 95% limits of agreement of -0.21 to 0.26 logMAR. The majority of the differences (77%) fell within the predetermined acceptable deviation limit of 0.15 logMAR. In addition, no patient characteristics or clinical parameters were found to significantly affect the accuracy of the web-based test. CONCLUSIONS:  This web-based test for measuring VA is a valid tool for remotely assessing VA, also when performed independently by patients at home. Implementation of validated web-based tools like this in the health care system may represent a valuable step forward in revolutionizing teleconsultations and can provide individual patients with the opportunity to self-monitor changes in VA. This is particularly relevant when the patient's access to ophthalmic care is limited. Future developments should focus on optimizing the testing conditions at home to reduce outliers.

Nationwide epidemiological approach to identify associations between keratoconus and immune-mediated diseases.

BACKGROUND: The aetiology of keratoconus (KC) remains poorly understood. KC has typically been described as a non-inflammatory disorder of the cornea. Nonetheless, there is increasing presumptive evidence for the role of the immune system in the pathogenesis of KC. AIM: To evaluate the association between KC and immune-mediated diseases on a population level. We hypothesise that KC is immune-mediated rather than a predominantly degenerative disease. METHODS: Data were obtained from the largest health insurance provider in the Netherlands. Dutch residents are obligatorily insured. The data contained all medical claims and sociodemographic characteristics from all KC patients plus all those data from a 1:6 age-matched and sex-matched control group. The primary outcome was the association between KC and immune-mediated diseases, as assessed by conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: Based on our analysis of 2051 KC cases and 12 306 matched controls, we identified novel associations between KC and Hashimoto's thyroiditis (OR=2.89; 95% CI: 1.41 to 5.94) and inflammatory skin conditions (OR=2.20; 95% CI: 1.37 to 3.53). We confirmed known associations between KC and atopic conditions, including allergic rash (OR=3.00; 95% CI: 1.03 to 8.79), asthma and bronchial hyperresponsiveness (OR=2.51; 95% CI: 1.63 to 3.84), and allergic rhinitis (OR=2.20; 95% CI: 1.39 to 3.49). CONCLUSION: Keratoconus appears positively associated with multiple immune-mediated diseases, which provides a population-based argument that systemic inflammatory responses may influence its onset. The identification of these particular diseases might shed light on potential comparable pathways through which this proinflammatory state is achieved, paving the way for pharmacological treatment strategies.

Correction: The evaluation of a web-based tool for measuring the uncorrected visual acuity and refractive error in keratoconus eyes: A method comparison study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256087.].

The evaluation of a web-based tool for measuring the uncorrected visual acuity and refractive error in keratoconus eyes: A method comparison study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcome of a web-based digital assessment of visual acuity and refractive error, compared to a conventional supervised assessment, in keratoconus patients with complex refractive errors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Keratoconus patients, aged 18 to 40, with a refractive error between -6 and +4 diopters were considered eligible. An uncorrected visual acuity and an assessment of refractive error was taken web-based (index test) and by manifest refraction (reference test) by an optometrist. Corrected visual acuity was assessed with the prescription derived from both the web-based tool and the manifest refraction. Non-inferiority was defined as the 95% limits-of-agreement (95%LoA) of the differences in spherical equivalent between the index and reference test not exceeding +/- 0.5 diopters. Agreement was assessed by a Bland-Altman analyses. RESULTS: A total of 100 eyes of 50 patients were examined. The overall mean difference of the uncorrected visual acuity measured -0.01 LogMAR (95%LoA:-0.63-0.60). The variability of the differences decreased in the better uncorrected visual acuity subgroup (95%LoA:-0.25-0.55). The overall mean difference in spherical equivalent between the index and reference test exceeded the non-inferiority margin: -0.58D (95%LoA:-4.49-3.33, P = 0.008). The mean differences for myopic and hyperopic subjects were 0.09 diopters (P = 0.675) and -2.06 diopters (P<0.001), respectively. The corrected visual acuities attained with the web-based derived prescription underachieved significantly (0.22±0.32 logMAR vs. -0.01±0.13 LogMAR, P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Regarding visual acuity, the web-based tool shows promising results for remotely assessing visual acuity in keratoconus patients, particularly for subjects within a better visual acuity range. This could provide physicians with a quantifiable outcome to enhance teleconsultations, especially relevant when access to health care is limited. Regarding the assessment of the refractive error, the web-based tool was found to be inferior to the manifest refraction in keratoconus patients. This study underlines the importance of validating digital tools and could serve to increase overall safety of the web-based assessments by better identification of outlier cases.

Digital Tools for the Self-Assessment of Visual Acuity: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Numerous digital tools to self-assess visual acuity have been introduced. The recent COVID-19 pandemic underlined the need for high-quality remote care. This review gives a current overview of digital tools for remotely assessing visual function and reports on their accuracy. METHODS: We searched the databases of Embase and Pubmed, and systematically reviewed the literature, conforming to PRISMA guidelines. Two preliminary papers were added from medRxiv.org. The main outcome was the agreement of the digital tools with conventional clinical charts, as expressed by mean differences and 95% limits of agreement (95% LoA). RESULTS: Seventeen publications included studies reported on 13 different digital tools. Most of the tools focus on distance visual acuity. The mean differences of the digital tools ranged from - 0.08 to 0.10 logMAR, when compared to traditional clinical assessments. The 95% LoA differed considerably between studies: from ± 0.08 logMAR to ± 0.47 logMAR, though the variability was less pronounced for higher visual acuities. CONCLUSION: The low mean differences between digital visual acuity assessments and reference charts suggest clinical equivalence, though the wide 95% LoA identify a lower precision of digital self-assessments. This effect diminishes in individuals with better visual acuities, which is a common feature of visual acuity assessments. There is great potential for the digital tools to increase access to eye care and we expect the accuracy of the current tools to improve with every iteration in technology development.