The socioeconomic effect of COVID-19 on pediatric ophthalmologists: data from the first 12 months.

PURPOSE: To investigate the socioeconomic effect on pediatric ophthalmologists (POs) of the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic and to assess the association of practice type with financial impact. METHODS: An email follow-up survey of all AAPOS active members (POs) in April 2021, was used in conjunction with two prior surveys. The majority of US states were represented, and respondents were categorized as academic/university (AU), hospital employee (H), or one of three types of private practice: multispecialty ophthalmology practice (MSP), pediatric ophthalmology/strabismus group (PG), or solo practice (SP). RESULTS: The cumulative results during this one-year period revealed 1,533,203 examinations not performed, of which 498,291 were Medicaid. Over 65,000 surgeries were not performed. The average salary loss per PO was $57,188. The total loss of revenue for the pediatric ophthalmology sector was over $303,788,000. Practice groups making at least 75% of their prior year revenue were as follows: H, 81%; AU, 64%; MSP, 52%; PG, 50%; SP, 40%. Salary reduction in each group was as follows: H, 4.2%; AU, 15.4%; MSP, 17.2%; PG, 23.1%; SP, 40.9%. The average loss per practice was $290,151. More than 95% of private practice POs received funds from the Paycheck Protection Program. CONCLUSIONS: At the one-year mark of the pandemic, patient care had been severely disrupted, with subsequent financial consequences. Private practice providers (and especially solo practices) were disproportionally negatively affected.

The impact of the COVID-19 shutdown on US pediatric ophthalmologists.

In recent months, the COVID-19 pandemic has threatened the financial viability of pediatric ophthalmology practices. To measure the economic impact, the American Association of Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS) Socio-economic Committee surveyed current US members at the peak of the COVID shutdown, in April 2020. With a robust response rate, the survey portrays that some pediatric ophthalmology practices are ominously strained, if not irreparably harmed.

Refractive outcomes following bevacizumab monotherapy compared with conventional laser treatment: a randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Children born prematurely who develop retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) often develop myopia, and those who require laser treatment may develop very high myopia, which has considerable clinical consequences. OBJECTIVE: To report refractive outcomes in preterm infants who developed ROP in zone I or zone II posterior as stage 3+ ROP or aggressive posterior ROP (APROP). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: All infants received intravitreal bevacizumab or laser therapy in a prospective, stratified, randomized, controlled, masked, multicenter clinical trial, Bevacizumab Eliminates the Angiogenic Threat for ROP (BEAT-ROP). Children who received intravitreal bevacizumab or laser in the BEAT-ROP clinical trial, with treatment randomized by infant, underwent cycloplegic retinoscopic refraction at a mean age of 2½ years. Fifteen centers with both pediatric and vitreoretinal ophthalmologists participating in level 3 neonatal intensive care units in academic centers with institutional review board approval were included in the trial. Of the originally enrolled 150 infants (300 eyes) in the BEAT-ROP clinical trial, 13 infants (26 eyes) died (6 received intravitreal bevacizumab; 7 received laser) and 19 eyes had intraocular surgery (6 infants bilaterally). Thus, 45 eyes (19 infants bilaterally) were excluded, leaving 131 infants (255 eyes, including 21 eyes that received a successful second treatment for recurrence). INTERVENTIONS: Follow-up of the BEAT-ROP cohort. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Spherical equivalent refractive outcomes and their distribution by ROP zone and treatment. RESULTS: Refractions were available for 109 of 131 eligible infants (83.2%) and 211 of 255 eyes (82.7%). Mean (SD) spherical equivalent refractions were as follows: zone I, -1.51 (3.42) diopters (D) in 52 eyes that received intravitreal bevacizumab and -8.44 (7.57) D in 35 eyes that received laser treatment (P < .001); and zone II posterior, -0.58 (2.53) D in 58 eyes that received intravitreal bevacizumab and -5.83 (5.87) D in 66 eyes that received laser treatment (P < .001). Very high myopia (≥-8.00 D) occurred in zone I in 2 of 52 (3.8%) eyes that received intravitreal bevacizumab and in 18 of 35 (51.4%) eyes that received laser treatment (P < .001). Very high myopia occurred in zone II posterior in 1 of 58 (1.7%) eyes that received intravitreal bevacizumab and in 24 of 66 (36.4%) eyes that received laser treatment (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: More very high myopia was found in eyes that received laser treatment than in eyes that received intravitreal bevacizumab. This difference is possibly related to anterior segment development that is present with intravitreal bevacizumab but minimal or absent following laser treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00622726.

Impact resistance of common spectacle and safety lenses to airgun and rimfire projectiles.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the penetration resistance of common spectacle and safety lenses to high-velocity projectiles and to examine the current recommendations regarding the use of such lenses. METHODS: The penetration threshold of glass, high-index, and polycarbonate spectacle and safety lenses was determined by firing BBs, pellets, and 0.22-caliber projectiles. The mass, diameter, velocity, and energy of each projectile were measured, and the center thickness, mass, and refractive power of each lens were recorded. The penetration threshold for each lens type was calculated, and a comparison of impact resistance was made. RESULTS: The maximum velocity of the BB was measured at 221 m/s; pellets at 210 m/s; CB.22 rimfire projectiles at 204 m/s; and 0.22 rimfire projectiles at 290 m/s. The BB penetration thresholds were as follows: glass lenses = 84.0 m/s (2.4 J) and high-index lenses = 107.7 m/s (4.09 J). Polycarbonate spectacle and safety lenses were not penetrated by BBs regardless of their velocity; however, these lenses were penetrated by CB.22 rimfire projectiles (89.2 J). Review of the penetrated lenses showed that center thickness and refractive power was comparable between the various groups of projectiles. CONCLUSIONS: Polycarbonate offers a vastly superior degree of penetration resistance compared with other commonly used lens materials. The current recommendations regarding the use of polycarbonate in prescription and protective lenses, as endorsed by the American Academy of Ophthalmology and the American Academy of Pediatrics, must be reevaluated.