Comparison of eyecare utilization at two service delivery levels during the COVID-19 pandemic as a measure of their impact: A multicentric retrospective analysis across four North Indian high-volume eyecare organizations.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the performance of the tertiary centers (TCS) and vision centers (VCs) of the four organizations participating in this research, once the lockdown was lifted, and to compare it with the performance during the same period of the previous year. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study assessing eyecare utilization in the first 2 months after resumption of services post the lockdown in 2020 and comparing that across the same time period in 2019. Anonymized data containing basic demographic details, proportions of patient visits and their reasons, as well as referral information was collected. The drop percentage method was used, and P values were calculated using paired t-tests. Results: Four TCs and 60 VCs were included. Overall, outpatient attendance dipped 51.2% at TCs and 27.5% at VCs, across the 2 years. At both levels of care delivery, the percentage drop in females was more than that in males; however, the overall drop at VCs was less than that at TCs, for both sexes. Eyecare utilization in pediatric populations dropped significantly more than in adult populations, across the overall sample. There was no significant change in referrals for refractive error as a proportion of total outpatients, although there was a significant decline in the same for cataract and specialty treatment. Conclusion: VCs are valuable and successful model for eyecare delivery especially in the continued aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Strategies for cataract and uncorrected refractive error case finding in India: Costs and cost-effectiveness at scale.

Background: India has the largest number of individuals suffering from visual impairment and blindness in the world. Recent surveys indicate that demand-based factors prevent more than 80% of people from seeking appropriate eye services, suggesting the need to scale up cost-effective case finding strategies. We assessed total costs and cost-effectiveness of multiple strategies to identify and encourage people to initiate corrective eye services. Methods: Using administrative and financial data from six Indian eye health providers, we conduct a retrospective micro-costing analysis of five case finding interventions that covered 1·4 million people served at primary eye care facilities (vision centers), 330,000 children screened at school, 310,000 people screened at eye camps and 290,000 people screened via door-to-door campaigns over one year. For four interventions, we estimate total provider costs, provider costs attributable to case finding and treatment initiation for uncorrected refractive error (URE) and cataracts, and the societal cost per DALY averted. We also estimate provider costs of deploying teleophthalmology capability within vision centers. Point estimates were calculated from provided data with confidence intervals determined by varying parameters probabilistically across 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations. Findings: Case finding and treatment initiation costs are lowest for eye camps (URE: $8·0 per case, 95% CI: 3·4-14·4; cataracts: $13·7 per case, 95% CI: 5·6-27·0) and vision centers (URE: $10·8 per case, 95% CI: 8·0-14·4; cataracts: $11·9 per case, 95% CI: 8·8-15·9). Door-to-door screening is as cost-effective for identifying and encouraging surgery for cataracts albeit with large uncertainty ($11·3 per case, 95% CI: 2·2 to 56·2), and more costly for initiating spectacles for URE ($25·8 per case, 95% CI: 24·1 to 30·7). School screening has the highest case finding and treatment initiation costs for URE ($29·3 per case, 95% CI: 15·5 to 49·6) due to the lower prevalence of eye problems in school aged children. The annualized cost of operating a vision center, excluding procurement of spectacles, is estimated at $11,707 (95% CI: 8,722-15,492). Adding teleophthalmology capability increases annualized costs by $1,271 per facility (95% CI: 181 to 3,340). Compared to baseline care, eye camps have an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $143 per DALY (95% CI: 93-251). Vision centers have an ICER of $262 per DALY (95% CI: 175-431) and were able to reach substantially more patients than any other strategy. Interpretation: Policy makers are expected to consider cost-effective case finding strategies when budgeting for eye health in India. Screening camps and vision centers are the most cost-effective strategies for identifying and encouraging individuals to undertake corrective eye services, with vision centers likely to be most cost-effective at greater scale. Investment in eye health continues to be very cost-effective in India. Funding: The study was funded by the Seva Foundation.

Reasons for Delayed Presentation for Cataract Surgery in Patients of Lens Induced Glaucoma - A Questionnaire-based Study at a Tertiary Eye Care Centre of Central Rural India.

PURPOSE: To describe the socioeconomic profile, awareness level and reasons for the delay in accessing timely eye care for cataract surgery in patients of lens-induced glaucoma (LIG). METHODS: This cross-sectional observational study included all patients with LIG who presented to a tertiary eye care centre in central rural India between March 2019 to February 2020. Data were collected through a questionnaire. RESULTS: Out of the 731 patients included in the study, the majority were females (69.36%). The mean age of the patients at presentation was 62.66 ± 10.37 years. Only a few participants, 193 (26.40%) were aware of LIG. Lower socioeconomic profile, older age, female gender and illiteracy were found to be strongly associated with awareness about LIG (p < .001). Patients waiting for the winter season (58.27%) to get operated was the major reason for delayed presentation to the hospital. Other reasons for the delayed presentation were - need not felt (feeling that intervention was not necessary) due to good vision in other eye (14.36%), financial issues (11.63%), long travelling distance (7.11%), no caretaker (6.89%), medical illness (1.78%) and fear of surgery (0.55%). CONCLUSION: Delayed reporting for eye healthcare in patients of LIG is found to be multifactorial. Most patients preferred waiting for the winter season to get their eyes operated, which throws light on the mindset and ignorance of the patients in this part of central rural India. We further emphasize on strengthening the education and counseling efforts in the community to enable patients to access services in a timely fashion.

A multicentric cross-sectional study measuring the equity of cataract surgical services in three high-volume eyecare organizations in North India: Equitable cataract surgical rate as a new indicator.

PURPOSE: Cataract remains the leading cause of blindness and visual impairment in most low-and middle-income countries, with the greatest burden borne by women. To achieve Global Action Plan targets, cataract programs must target people, especially women, with maximum need. This study examines whether cataract surgical programs in three major north Indian eyecare institutions are equitable and describes a refined indicator for reporting equity. METHODS: Retrospective one-year cross-sectional study of cataract surgery utilization using routine administrative data from three north Indian eyecare institutions. Patient data were categorized by paying category, sex, and preoperative visual acuity. Comparisons were made between payment categories and sexes. RESULTS: Out of the total number of patients operated, 86,230 were in the non-paying category and 56,738 in the paying category. Overall, 8.2% were blind, 21.1% were severely visual impaired (SVI) or worse, and 86.1% were moderate visual impaired (MVI) or worse. Non-paying patients had a significantly higher proportion of poorer visual categories compared to paying patients [(blind, 9.7% vs. 5.8%; SVI or worse, 24.6% vs. 15.8%; and MVI or worse, 89.1% vs. 81.6%, respectively, (P < 0.001)]. Women had significantly higher proportion of poorer visual categories than men [(blind, 8.9% vs. 7.4%, SVI or worse, 21.9% vs. 20.3% and MVI or worse 87.6 vs. 84.7%) (P < 0.001)]. CONCLUSION: The institutions primarily provided surgery to patients with maximum need: too poor to pay, low visual acuity, and women. Similar data from all service providers of a region can help estimate the proposed "equitable cataract surgical rate": the proportion of patients operated with maximum need among those operated in a year. This can be used for targeting people in need.

Primary eye care in India - The vision center model.

The World Health Organization (WHO) Global Action Plan (GAP) 2014-19 emphasize providing Comprehensive Eye Care (CEC) using the health system approach to achieve Universal Eye Health Coverage (UEHC). An important aspect of CEC is Primary Eye Care (PEC). The scope of PEC varies significantly with primary health workers providing PEC in most parts of the developing world, whereas in developed nations PEC is provided by specialized personnel such as optometrists. This article focuses on delivery of PEC models in India, specifically through the vision center (VC) approach. VCs are part of a larger eye care network and provide PEC in remote rural areas of the country. The authors describe the how PEC is delivered in more than 300 VCs operated by six mentor hospitals in India under the Global Sight Initiative (GSI). Key factors compared include: The role of leadership; human resource planning, including recruitment and retention; service delivery; leveraging technology for planning and reaching key populations; financial sustainability; supply chain management; and quality and monitoring. It also discusses issues to be considered to strengthen VCs as we move ahead towards our collective goal of achieving UEHC and eliminating avoidable blindness.