Patient Concerns Regarding Suspended Ophthalmic Care Due to COVID-19.

PURPOSE: The temporary cessation and profound changes in ophthalmic care delivery that occurred as a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have yet to be fully understood. Our objective is to assess patients' self-reported impact of health care lockdown measures on their fears and anxieties during the crisis period of the COVID-19 pandemic in New York City. METHODS: We conducted a digital, self-reported, patient care survey distributed by an e-mail at Columbia University's Department of Ophthalmology outpatient faculty practice. Inclusion criteria were age greater than or equal to 18 years, a diagnosis of either retinal disease or glaucoma, and a canceled or rescheduled ophthalmology established patient appointment during the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in New York City. Patients without an e-mail address listed in their electronic medical records were excluded. The survey occurred between March 2, 2020, to May 30, 2020. Primary measures were survey responses to assess key areas of patient anxiety or concern during the pandemic including the safety of care delivery in a COVID pandemic, difficulties contacting or being seen by their ophthalmologist, concern of vision loss or disease progression, and concern over missed or access to treatments. Secondary measures were correlating survey response to factors such as visual acuity, intraocular pressure, diagnosis, disease severity, follow-up urgency, recent treatments, and diagnostic testing data. RESULTS: Of the 2594 surveys sent out, 510 (19.66%) were completed. Over 95% of patients were at least as concerned as in normal circumstances about their ocular health during the peak of the pandemic. Overall, 76% of respondents were more concerned than normal that they could not be seen by their ophthalmologist soon enough. Increased concern over ocular health, disease progression, and access to care all showed positive correlations (P<0.05) with worse disease severity as measured with testing such as visual fields and optical coherence tomography. In addition, 55% of patients were afraid of contracting COVID-19 during an office visit. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: We found a majority of our patients were concerned about limitations in access to ophthalmic care and were fearful of disease progression. In addition, we found a number of demographic and clinical factors that correlated with increased anxiety in our patients.

Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-up Study in Vulnerable Populations (NYC-SIGHT): Design and Methodology.

PRCIS: The Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-up Study in Vulnerable Populations is a 5-year prospective, cluster-randomized study to improve detection and management of glaucoma and other eye diseases in vulnerable populations living in affordable housing developments. PURPOSE: To describe the study design and methodology of the Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-up Study in Vulnerable Populations, which aims to investigate whether community-based vision screenings can improve detection and management of glaucoma, vision impairment, cataract, and other eye diseases among vulnerable populations living in affordable housing developments in upper Manhattan. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This 5-year prospective, cluster-randomized, controlled trial consists of vision screening and referral for follow-up eye care among eligible residents aged 40 and older. Visual acuity, intraocular pressure (IOP), and fundus photography are measured. Participants with visual worse than 20/40, or IOP 23 to 29 mm Hg, or unreadable fundus images fail the screening and are scheduled with the on-site optometrist. Those with an abnormal image and/or IOP ≥30 mm Hg, are assigned as "fast-track" and referred to ophthalmology. Participants living in 7 developments randomized to the Enhanced Intervention Group who fail the screening and need vision correction receive complimentary eyeglasses. Those referred to ophthalmology receive enhanced support with patient navigators to assist with follow-up eye care. Participants living in 3 developments randomized to the Usual Care Group who fail the screening and need vision correction are given an eyeglasses prescription only and a list of optical shops. No enhanced support is given to the Usual Care Group. All participants referred to ophthalmology are assisted in making their initial eye exam appointment. CONCLUSION: This study targets vulnerable populations where they live to ensure improved access to and utilization of eye care services in those who are least likely to seek eye care.

The Challenge of Managing Bilateral Acute Angle-closure Glaucoma in the Presence of Active SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

PURPOSE: To report a case of bilateral acute angle-closure glaucoma associated with hyponatremia in the setting of chlorthalidone use and SARS-CoV-2 infection, and to demonstrate the challenges of managing this patient given her infectious status. METHODS: This was a case report. CASE: A 65-year-old woman taking chlorthalidone for hypertension presented to the emergency room with headache, pain, and blurry vision in both eyes and was found to be in bilateral acute angle closure. On laboratory investigation, she was severely hyponatremic and also tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. B-scan ultrasound demonstrated an apparent supraciliary effusion in the right eye. Following stabilization of her intraocular pressures with medical management, she ultimately underwent cataract extraction with iridectomies and goniosynechiolysis in both eyes. CONCLUSIONS: We report a rare case of bilateral acute angle-closure glaucoma associated with hyponatremia. Chlorthalidone use and perhaps SARS-CoV-2 infection may have contributed to this electrolyte abnormality and unique clinical presentation. In addition, we discuss the challenges of managing this complex patient with active SARS-CoV-2 infection during the pandemic.

Ophthalmology and Ethics in the COVID-19 Era.

PURPOSE: The novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19), has disrupted the practice of ophthalmology and threatens to forever alter how we care for our patients. Physicians across the country encounter unique clinical dilemmas daily. This paper presents a curated set of ethical dilemmas facing ophthalmologists both during and following the pandemic. DESIGN: Perspective. METHODS: Case presentations drawn from actual clinical scenarios were presented during a virtual ophthalmology grand rounds and discussed with the director of clinical ethics at Columbia University Irving Medical Center. RESULTS: It has become routine to expect an ophthalmologist to be involved in many levels of care for patients critically ill with COVID-19. Ophthalmology patients, even those with chronic, progressive conditions, are being triaged, and vision-saving interventions are being postponed. Four questions were applied to each scenario, allowing for ethical conclusions to be reached. The following questions were posed: what is the imminence and severity of the harm expected without intervention? What is the efficacy of the intervention under consideration? What are the risks of treatment for the patient? What are the risks of treating the patient for the health care team? CONCLUSIONS: During this pandemic and for months, perhaps years, to come, it is critical to reconsider the ethical principles underlying modern medicine and ophthalmic care as well as the ramifications of our decisions and actions.

Review of Hygiene and Disinfection Recommendations for Outpatient Glaucoma Care: A COVID Era Update.

This review focuses on best practices and recommendations for hygiene and disinfection to limit exposure and transmission of infection in outpatient glaucoma clinics during the current COVID-19 pandemic.