Survey on allied health personnel in Canadian ophthalmology: the scalpel for change.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the recruiting and training needs for ophthalmic medical personnel (OMP), assess the value of their certification, and compare the ophthalmic practice productivity and performance of non-certified and certified OMP, as rated by both ophthalmologists and OMP. DESIGN: Comparative analysis. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and sixteen Canadian ophthalmologists and 98 OMP. METHODS: An invitation to complete an online survey on OMP recruitment, training, certification, and productivity performance in a clinical setting was sent to 1081 ophthalmologists and OMP. RESULTS: Fifteen percent of ophthalmologists and 31% of OMP completed the survey. Ophthalmologists (61%) reported difficulty hiring OMP; employee referrals was the best method (40%). Awareness of formal OMP training programs was high and 50% of respondents supported developing additional training programs; 55% of OMP were encouraged by their employers to obtain certification. Personal challenge and achievement (79%) and improved skills (71%) were the main reasons for OMP to obtain certification. The majority of OMP and ophthalmologists felt that certified OMP enhanced most practice productivity measures. Higher wages associated with certification were reported by 73% of respondents. CONCLUSIONS: Training of qualified OMP was identified as a need by ophthalmologists. Ophthalmic practices can increase their overall productivity by adding certified OMP to their staff.

Prospective assessment in newborns of diabetes autoimmunity (PANDA): maternal understanding of infant diabetes risk.

PURPOSE: To assess accuracy of mothers' understanding of their newborns' genetic risk for type 1 diabetes and to identify predictors of the comprehension and retention of genetic information. METHODS: Mothers of 435 newborns genetically screened at birth were informed of the infant's risk for type 1 diabetes using a standard script that provided both categorical and numerical risk information. The mothers' comprehension and retention of this information were assessed by structured interview on two occasions, approximately 3.6 weeks and approximately 3.9 months postnotification. RESULTS: At the initial interview, 73.1% of mothers gave a correct estimate of their child's genetic risk, 3.2% overestimated risk, 13.3% underestimated risk, and 10.3% could not recall risk at all. At the follow-up interview, fewer mothers (61.9%) correctly estimated their child's risk and more mothers (24.4%) underestimated their child's risk. Maternal accuracy was associated with maternal education, ethnic minority status, infant risk status, maternal ability to spontaneously recall both categorical and numerical risk estimates, and length of time since risk notification. Underestimation of risk was associated with maternal education, family history of diabetes, time since risk notification, and maternal anxiety about the baby's risk. CONCLUSION: The accuracy of mothers' recall of infant risk declines over time, with an increasing number of mothers underestimating the infant's risk. Effective risk communication strategies need to be developed and incorporated into genetic screening programs.