The Better Operative Outcomes Software Tool (BOOST) Prospective Study: Improving the Quality of Cataract Surgery Outcomes in Low-Resource Settings.

PURPOSE: Post-operative vision impairment is common among patients who have undergone cataract surgery in low-resource settings, impacting quality of clinical outcomes and patient experience. This prospective, multisite, single-armed, pragmatic validation study aimed to assess whether receiving tailored recommendations via the free Better Operative Outcomes Software Tool (BOOST) app improved surgical outcomes, as quantified by post-operative unaided distance visual acuity (UVA) measured 1-3 days after surgery. METHODS: During the baseline data collection round, surgeons in low and middle-income countries recorded clinical characteristics of 60 consecutive cataract cases in BOOST. Additional data on the causes of poor outcomes from 20 consecutive cases with post-operative UVA of <6/60 (4-12 weeks post-surgery) were entered to automatically generate tailored recommendations for improvement, before 60 additional consecutive cases were recorded during the follow-up study round. Average UVA was compared between cases recorded in the baseline study round and those recorded during follow-up. RESULTS: Among 4,233 cataract surgeries performed by 41 surgeons in 18 countries, only 2,002 (47.3%) had post-operative UVA 6/12 or better. Among the 14 surgeons (34.1%) who completed both rounds of the study (1,680 cases total), there was no clinically significant improvement in post-operative average UVA (logMAR units ±SD) between baseline (0.50 ± 0.37) and follow-up (0.47 ± 0.36) rounds (mean improvement 0.03, p = 0.486). CONCLUSIONS: Receiving BOOST-generated recommendations did not result in improved UVA beyond what could be expected from prospective monitoring of surgical outcomes alone. Additional research is required to assess whether targeted support to implement changes could potentiate the uptake of app-generated recommendations and improve outcomes.

Quality of Refractive Error Care in Cambodia: An Unannounced Standardized Patient Study.

PURPOSE: Quality-of-care in refractive error services is essential, as it directly affects vision outcomes, wellbeing, educational attainment, and workforce participation. In Cambodia, uncorrected refractive error is a leading cause of mild and moderate vision impairment in adults. We evaluated the quality of refractive error care in Cambodia by estimating the proportion of prescribed and dispensed spectacles appropriate for people's refractive error needs and factors associated with spectacle quality. METHODS: A cross-sectional protocol was employed with 18 Khmer-speaking adult participants observing testing procedures in 156 optical services across six provinces in 2022. A total of 496 dispensed spectacles were assessed against spectacle quality indicators. RESULTS: The analysis revealed that 35.1% of dispensed spectacles were of optimal quality. The most common error observed in sub-optimal spectacles was the presence of horizontal prism outside of tolerance limits. The study also found that 44.0% of emmetrope visits involved unnecessary prescription spectacle recommendations, and 18.3% of written prescriptions did not correspond with dispensed spectacles. Sex differences were observed, with men predominantly providing refractive error care and women more likely to be unnecessarily recommended prescription spectacles. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight the importance of prioritizing quality-of-care in refractive error services. A key recommendation is to consider regulatory mechanisms to ensure optical services employ appropriately qualified staff. Additionally, efforts should be made to eliminate unnecessary prescriptions -- especially for emmetropes and females -- standardize written prescriptions, ensure consistent pupil distance measurements, reduce reliance on autorefraction, and address the gender imbalance in the refractive error workforce.

Quality of refractive error care in Pakistan: an unannounced standardised patient study.

OBJECTIVE: Undercorrected refractive errors are the primary cause of vision impairment worldwide, including in Pakistan. However, limited data exist on the quality of refractive error care. Our study assessed the quality of refractive error care in Punjab, Pakistan by estimating the proportion of spectacles that were optimally prescribed. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this cross-sectional study, 12 unannounced standardised patients (USPs) from Jhang, Khanewal and Sahiwal districts were recruited. USPs underwent baseline subjective refraction and were trained to attend optical services, observe consultations, request spectacles and obtain prescriptions. The spectacles received were compared with baseline refraction to determine quality. We also examined the associations between spectacle quality, service and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Out of 276 attempted visits to 69 optical services, 241 pairs of spectacles were dispensed. A population size-weighted percentage of 42.7% (95% CI 36.4% to 49.3%) of spectacles were optimal quality, with the range varying from 13.8% in Jhang to 67.0% in Khanewal. Half the suboptimal quality spectacles had horizontal prism deviations outside of tolerance limits. Optimal spectacles were associated with performing focimetry (unadjusted OR=7.15, 95% CI (3.02 to 16.94), p<0.001) and good communication (OR=2.23, 95% CI (1.06 to 4.67), p=0.03). Hyperopic USPs were less likely to receive optimal spectacles (OR=0.01 95% CI (0.00 to 0.11), p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The quality of refractive error care in Pakistan requires improvement, particularly in the Jhang district. Key areas for enhancing refractive error care in Pakistan include refining dispensing and refraction skills for hyperopic prescriptions, providing training on the risks of using previous spectacles, and emphasising the importance of effective communication skills.

Quality of refractive error care (Q.REC) in Cambodia, Malaysia and Pakistan: protocol for a cross-sectional unannounced standardised patient study.

INTRODUCTION: There are 161 million people living with vision impairment, due to uncorrected refractive errors. A further 510 million people are living with near-vision impairment. There is a need for clearly defined indicators that capture the quality of refractive error service outputs and outcomes and provide insights to shape, change and stimulate action. This study aims to evaluate the quality of refractive error care (Q.REC) in Cambodia, Malaysia and Pakistan, by using unannounced standardised patients (USPs) to identify the proportion of prescribed and dispensed spectacles appropriate for people's refractive error needs and pinpoint/detail opportunities for quality improvement. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: A cross-sectional Q.REC study will be conducted in randomly selected optical services in Cambodia (180 services, 900 USP visits), the Klang Valley in Malaysia (66 services, 198 USP visits) and in Jhang, Sahiwal and Khanewal districts of Punjab region/state in Pakistan (64 services, 256 USP visits). USPs will receive baseline refractions by three skilled study optometrists/refractionists trained in the Q.REC protocol. USPs will then visit individual optical services, undergo a refraction, purchase spectacles or lenses (if recommended) and record observations about which elements of a refraction and dispensing were conducted. The study optometrist/refractionist will assess each pair of dispensed spectacles by examining the USP's aided visual acuity and visual comfort at distance and/or near and compare the lens prescription to the averaged baseline refraction. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the University of New South Wales Human Research Ethics Committee (HC210102), the National Ethics Committee for Health Research in Cambodia (043 NECHR), National Medical Research Registry and the Medical Research and Ethics Committee (NMRR-21-689-59279) in Malaysia and the College of Ophthalmology & Allied Vision Sciences Ethical Review Board (COAVS 545/2021) in Pakistan. Written informed consent will be obtained from USPs. Service owners will have the opportunity to opt-out verbally or in writing. Results will be disseminated locally through workshops including the relevant local ministry of health personnel and stakeholders, published in peer-reviewed publications and presented at national and international conferences.

Teachers' influence on purchase and wear of children's glasses in rural China: The PRICE study.

IMPORTANCE: Uncorrected refractive error causes 90% of poor vision among Chinese children. BACKGROUND: Little is known about teachers' influence on children's glasses wear. DESIGN: Cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Children at 138 randomly selected primary schools in Guangdong and Yunnan provinces, China, with uncorrected visual acuity (VA) ≤6/12 in either eye correctable to >6/12 in both eyes, and their teachers. METHODS: Teachers and children underwent VA testing and completed questionnaires about spectacles use and attitudes towards children's vision. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Children's acceptance of free glasses, spectacle purchase and wear. RESULTS: A total of 882 children (mean age 10.6 years, 45.5% boys) and 276 teachers (mean age 37.9 years, 67.8% female) participated. Among teachers, 20.4% (56/275) believed glasses worsened children's vision, 68.4% (188/275) felt eye exercises prevented myopia, 55.0% (151/275) thought children with modest myopia should not wear glasses and 93.1% (256/275) encouraged children to obtain glasses. Teacher factors associated with children's glasses-related behaviour included believing glasses harm children's vision (decreased purchase, univariate model: relative risk [RR] 0.65, 95% CI 0.43, 0.98, P < 0.05); supporting children's classroom glasses wear (increased glasses wear, univariate model: RR 2.20, 95% CI 1.23, 3.95, P < 0.01); and advising children to obtain glasses (increased free glasses acceptance, multivariate model: RR 2.74, 95% CI 1.29, 5.84, P < 0.01; increased wear, univariate model: RR 2.93, 95% CI 1.45, 5.90, P < 0.01), but not teacher's ownership/wear of glasses. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Though teachers had limited knowledge about children's vision, they influenced children's glasses acceptance.

Cluster-randomized controlled trial of the effects of free glasses on purchase of children's glasses in China: The PRICE (Potentiating Rural Investment in Children's Eyecare) study.

BACKGROUND: Offering free glasses can be important to increase children's wear. We sought to assess whether "Upgrade glasses" could avoid reduced glasses sales when offering free glasses to children in China. METHODS: In this cluster-randomized, controlled trial, children with uncorrected visual acuity (VA)< = 6/12 in either eye correctable to >6/12 in both eyes at 138 randomly-selected primary schools in 9 counties in Guangdong and Yunnan provinces, China, were randomized by school to one of four groups: glasses prescription only (Control); Free Glasses; Free Glasses + offer of $15 Upgrade Glasses; Free Glasses + offer of $30 Upgrade Glasses. Spectacle purchase (main outcome) was assessed 6 months after randomization. RESULTS: Among 10,234 children screened, 882 (8.62%, mean age 10.6 years, 45.5% boys) were eligible and randomized: 257 (29.1%) at 37 schools to Control; 253 (28.7%) at 32 schools to Free Glasses; 187 (21.2%) at 31 schools to Free Glasses + $15 Upgrade; and 185 (21.0%) at 27 schools to Free Glasses +$30 Upgrade. Baseline ownership among these children needing glasses was 11.8% (104/882), and 867 (98.3%) children completed follow-up. Glasses purchase was significantly less likely when free glasses were given: Control: 59/250 = 23.6%; Free glasses: 32/252 = 12.7%, P = 0.010. Offering Upgrade Glasses eliminated this difference: Free + $15 Upgrade: 39/183 = 21.3%, multiple regression relative risk (RR) 0.90 (0.56-1.43), P = 0.65; Free + $30 Upgrade: 38/182 = 20.9%, RR 0.91 (0.59, 1.42), P = 0.69. CONCLUSIONS: Upgrade glasses can prevent reductions in glasses purchase when free spectacles are provided, providing important program income. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02231606. Registered on 31 August 2014.