Remote follow-up after cataract surgery (CORE-RCT): study protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cataract surgery has become one of the most performed surgical procedures worldwide. Postoperative management consists of routine clinical examinations to assess post-operative visual function and detect possible adverse events. Due to the low incidence of complications, the majority of clinic visits after cataract surgery are uneventful. Nonetheless, valuable time and hospital resources are consumed. We hypothesize that remote post-operative follow-up involving teleconsultations and self-assessments of visual function and health status, could be a valid alternative to face-to-face clinical examinations in selected patient groups. The practice of remote follow-up after cataract surgery has not yet been evaluated. The aim of this study is to investigate the validity, safety and cost-effectiveness of remote cataract surgery follow-up, and to report on the patients' experiences with remotely self-assessing visual function. METHODS: This study is a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial. Patients planned for cataract surgery on both eyes, without ocular comorbidities, are eligible for participation. Participants will be allocated (1:1) into one of the two study groups: 'telemonitoring' or 'usual care'. Participants in the 'telemonitoring' group will perform in-home assessments after cataract surgery (remote web-based eye exams and digital questionnaires on their own devices). Participants in the 'usual care' group will have regular post-operative consultations, according to the study site's regular practice. Outcome measures include accuracy of the web-based eye exam for assessing visual acuity and refraction, patient-reported outcome measures (visual function and quality of life), adverse events, and cost aspects. DISCUSSION: Investigating remote follow-up after cataract surgery fits the current trends of digitization of health care. We believe that remote self-care can be a promising avenue to comply with the increasing demands of cataract care. This randomized controlled trial provides scientific evidence on this unmet need and delivers the desired insights on (cost)effectiveness of remote follow-up after cataract surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04809402. Date of registration: March 22, 2021.

The evaluation of an online nurse-assisted eye-screening tool in older adults receiving home healthcare.

PURPOSE: To investigate the agreement between an online nurse-assisted eye-screening tool and reference tests in older adults receiving home healthcare and to collect user experiences. METHODS: Older adults (65+) receiving home healthcare were included. Home healthcare nurses assisted in administering the eye-screening tool at participants' homes. Approximately 2 weeks later, a researcher administered reference tests at participants' homes. Experiences from participants and home healthcare nurses were collected. Agreement in outcomes (distance and near visual acuity, with the latter being measured using two different optotypes, and macular problems) between the eye-screening tool and reference clinical testing was compared. A difference of less than ±0.15 logMAR was considered acceptable. RESULTS: A total of 40 participants were included. Here, we describe the results for the right eye; results for the left eye were similar. The mean difference between the eye-screening tool and reference tests for distance visual acuity was 0.02 logMAR. The mean difference between the eye-screening tool and reference tests using two different optotypes for near visual acuity was 0.06 and 0.03 logMAR, respectively. The majority of the individual data points were within the ±0.15 logMAR threshold (75%, 51% and 58%, respectively). The agreement between tests for macular problems was 75%. Participants and home healthcare nurses were generally satisfied with the eye-screening tool, although remarks for further improvements were made. CONCLUSIONS: The eye-screening tool is promising for nurse-assisted eye screening in older adults receiving home healthcare, with the mostly satisfactory agreement. After implementing the eye-screening tool in practice, cost-effectiveness needs to be investigated.

Validation of an Independent Web-Based Tool for Measuring Visual Acuity and Refractive Error (the Manifest versus Online Refractive Evaluation Trial): Prospective Open-Label Noninferiority Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Digital tools provide a unique opportunity to increase access to eye care. We developed a Web-based test that measures visual acuity and both spherical and cylindrical refractive errors. This test is Conformité Européenne marked and available on the Easee website. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of this Web-based tool with traditional subjective manifest refraction in a prospective open-label noninferiority clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of a Web-based refraction compared with a manifest refraction (golden standard). METHODS: Healthy volunteers from 18 to 40 years of age, with a refraction error between -6 and +4 diopter (D), were eligible. Each participant performed the Web-based test, and the reference test was performed by an optometrist. An absolute difference in refractive error of <0.5 D was considered noninferior. Reliability was assessed by using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Both uncorrected and corrected visual acuity were measured. RESULTS: A total of 200 eyes in 100 healthy volunteers were examined. The Web-based assessment of refractive error had excellent correlation with the reference test (ICC=0.92) and was considered noninferior to the reference test. Uncorrected visual acuity was similar with the Web-based test and the reference test (P=.21). Visual acuity was significantly improved using the prescription obtained by using the Web-based tool (P<.01). The Web-based test provided the best results in participants with mild myopia (ie, <3 D), with a mean difference of 0.02 (SD 0.49) D (P=.48) and yielding a corrected visual acuity of >1.0 in 90% (n=77) of participants. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that Web-based eye testing is a valid and safe method for measuring visual acuity and refractive error in healthy eyes, particularly for mild myopia. This tool can be used for screening purposes, and it is an easily accessible alternative to the subjective manifest refraction test. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03313921; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03313921.