Patient Demand for Ophthalmologists in the United States: A Google Trends Analysis.

PURPOSE: To study geographic patterns in ophthalmologist supply and patient demand for services in the United States. METHODS: Google Trends data for the keywords "ophthalmology" and "ophthalmologist" between 2004 and 2019 were queried and normalized to determine relative search volumes (RSV) for each United States state. Ophthalmologist density was calculated by dividing the number of practicing ophthalmologists by the State Census Bureau population estimates. RSV values were divided by ophthalmologist density and normalized to calculate the relative demand index (RDI) for each state. The number of accredited ophthalmology programs per state was acquired through the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. RESULTS: Ophthalmologist concentration was highly heterogeneous across the country. The states with the highest concentration of ophthalmologist per 10,000 people were Washington, DC (1.42), Maryland (0.94), Massachusetts (0.87), and New York (0.86), while the lowest were Wyoming (0.19), Idaho (0.36), New Mexico (0.38), and Nevada (0.39). RSVs ranged from 36 (Alaska and North Dakota) to 100 (Michigan). The highest RDI was found in South Dakota (100), Delaware (84), Michigan (66), and Arizona (56). The lowest RDI was in Washington, DC (0), Hawaii (7), Oregon (8), and Montana (14). The highest number of ophthalmology residency programs were in New York (18), Texas (9), and California (9), whereas 12 states lacked residency programs altogether. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found a wide range in the geographic distribution of ophthalmologists and residency programs in the United States. States with the highest relative demand index may represent areas most at risk of unmet medical needs.

Ophthalmology procedure trends in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the relationship between the COVID-19 pandemic and ophthalmic procedural volume. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using TriNetX, a federated electronic health record's research network was done. Monthly Current Procedural Terminology-specific volumes per healthcare organization were clustered chronologically to calculate average volumes into 3-month seasons to calculate average procedural volumes. An aggregate of the total pandemic period (March 2020-August 2021) was compared to corresponding figures in pre-pandemic timeframes. RESULTS: Intravitreal injections were the most prevalent procedure in this time period with 320,106 occurrences. Phacoemulsification cataract surgery was the second most prevalent (N = 176,095) procedure. From March 2020 to August 2021, a mean pandemic volume of 266.7 (SD = 15) was observed, a 5% decrease (p < 0.05) in procedures compared to the pre-pandemic mean of 280.8 (SD = 26.1). Spring 2020 exhibited the sharpest seasonal decrease in procedural volume (- 88%). The largest count of statistically significant increases in procedure volume was in Spring 2021 (+ 18%). The aggregate mean volume per HCO showed significant decreases for 11 out of 17 procedures in the 12 month March 2020-February 2021 timeframe and significant decreases for 10 out of 17 procedures over the 18-month March 2020-August 2021 pandemic period. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the relative inverse relationship between COVID-19 cases and ophthalmic procedure volume in America. Quantifying ophthalmic procedure trends is important in retrospectively assessing surgical disruptions and prospectively accommodating delayed surgeries. Furthermore, awareness of these trends could help ophthalmologists prepare should similar disruptions occur in the setting of future pandemics or national disasters.

Associations between gynecologic clinician type and routine female sexual dysfunction screening.

BACKGROUND: Female sexual dysfunction (FSD) is a common problem in the United States; however, only 14% to 40% of women are screened by their health care clinicians. There are few data on how differences in clinician type affects screening rates. AIM: This study aimed to assess differences in FSD screening rates among gynecology clinician types, identify factors associated with screening, and compare screening rates of FSD against conditions with established screening recommendations. METHODS: Data were collected by retrospective chart review of annual visits at an urban tertiary care center. Screening rates for FSD, depression, cervical cancer, and breast cancer were calculated and compared. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was utilized to assess the correlation between various patient characteristics and FSD screening rates. OUTCOMES: Study outcome measures included percentages of women who were screened for FSD, depression, cervical cancer, and breast cancer. RESULTS: FSD screening rate was significantly higher among resident-level clinicians vs nonresident clinicians (59% vs 31%; P < .001). When the nonresident clinicians were subanalyzed, certified nursing midwives were the second most likely to screen for FSD (odds ratio [OR], 0.41), followed by nurse practitioners (OR, 0.29) and attending physicians (OR, 0.22). According to multivariable logistic regression techniques, 5 factors were associated with an increased likelihood of a patient being screened for FSD at an annual examination: patient seen by a resident physician rather than an attending physician, patient history of FSD, patient age ≥40 years, patient report of being sexually active at the time of visit, and patient history of cervical procedures. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: There is an opportunity to improve FSD screening rates by clinicians. Future research may assess what factors, such as increased sexual function education or greater incentives to document FSD screening, may result in higher screening rates. From this, targeted and effective interventions might be crafted to improve future screening rates. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This study is one of the first to compare FSD screening rates among clinician types in the same specialty. Study limitations include the inherent limitations of a retrospective design, including selection biases. CONCLUSION: Residents were more likely to screen for FSD at annual well-woman visits than attending clinicians, nurse practitioners, and certified nurse midwives. Understanding the reasons for varied FSD screening rates among clinician types may aid in the development of strategies to improve screening for this important aspect of women's health.