Association of Patient Characteristics With Delivery of Ophthalmic Telemedicine During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Telemedicine has been shown to have had reduced uptake among historically marginalized populations within multiple medical specialties during the COVID-19 pandemic. An evaluation of health disparities among patients receiving ophthalmic telemedical care during the pandemic is needed. Objective: To evaluate disparities in the delivery of ophthalmic telemedicine at Massachusetts Eye and Ear (MEE) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, cross-sectional study analyzed clinical visits at a single tertiary eye care center (MEE) from January 1 to December 31, 2020. Patients who had ophthalmology and optometry clinical visits at the MEE during the study period were included. Exposures: Telemedicine vs in-person clinical encounters. Main Outcomes and Measures: Variables associated with use of ophthalmic telemedicine during the study period. Results: A total of 2262 telemedicine ophthalmic encounters for 1911 patients were included in the analysis. The median age of the patients was 61 (interquartile range, 43-72) years, and 1179 (61.70%) were women. With regard to race and ethnicity, 87 patients (4.55%) identified as Asian; 128 (6.70%), as Black or African American; 23 (1.20%), as Hispanic or Latino; and 1455 (76.14%), as White. On multivariate analysis, factors associated with decreased receipt of telemedical care included male sex (odds ratio [OR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.96), Black race (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56-0.86), not speaking English (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48-0.81), educational level of high school or less (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71-0.97), and age (OR per year of age, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.989-0.998). When comparing telephone- and video-based telemedicine visits, decreased participation in video-based visits was associated with age (OR per year of age, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94-0.98), educational level of high school or less (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.29-0.99), being unemployed (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.12-0.68), being retired (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.10-0.42), or having a disability (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.04-0.23). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study, though limited to retrospective data from a single university-based practice, suggest that historically marginalized populations were less likely to receive ophthalmic telemedical care compared with in-person care during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. Understanding the causes of these disparities might help those who need access to virtual care.

Retrospective Analysis of Retinal Imaging in COVID-19 Positive Patients at a Tertiary Eye Care Center.

PURPOSE: Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous authors have published data demonstrating retinal changes found in patients with COVID-19. However, others have debated the significance of these findings and the effects of COVID-19 on the retina remain uncertain. This study aims to better understand retinal findings in patients with COVID-19. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with a history of a positive COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction test was performed between March 1st, 2020 and October 31st, 2020. Patients were included if they presented within 90 days of their first positive COVID-19 test and underwent color fundus photography and/or OCT of the macula. All images were reviewed by two independent graders who assessed the presence of retinal heme, cotton wool spots, vascular sheathing, and disc edema, as well as hyper-reflective changes, intra-retinal fluid, and sub-retinal fluid on OCT. RESULTS: A total of 119 eyes from 61 patients were included. Among 83 eyes which underwent OCT of the macula, inner retinal hyper-reflective changes were seen in 16.9% (n=14), outer retinal hyper-reflective changes in 18.1% (n=15), intra-retinal fluid in 28.9% (n=24), and sub-retinal fluid in 14.5% (n=12). Among 48 eyes which underwent color fundus photography, retinal hemorrhage was seen in 27.1% (n=13), optic disc edema in 2.1% (n=1), and cotton wool spots in none of the eyes. Sub-analysis of 70 eyes from 41 patients with no alternative retinal pathology to potentially explain the above findings revealed none of the above exam findings on OCT of the macula (n=35), fundus photography (n=28), or documented exam (n=66). CONCLUSION: While a number of patients seen after COVID-19 infection demonstrated retinal findings, all could be explained by pre-existing retinal conditions. In a sub-group of eyes without pre-existing retinal disease, we did not identify any retinal findings that could be associated with COVID-19.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Ophthalmic Care at an Eye-Specific Emergency Department in an Outbreak Hotspot.

PURPOSE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there is growing concern that patients are forgoing necessary care. Emergency departments (ED) represent an important site of eye care. We analyzed patterns of ED visits at an eye-specific ED since the declaration of the public health crisis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective, cross-sectional single center study, medical records of 6744 patients who presented to the Massachusetts Eye and Ear ED between March 1st and April 30th in 2018, 2019, and 2020 were studied. The primary outcome measures were total volume of ED visits, proportion of urgent ED visits, and proportion of surgical visits. RESULTS: Overall, the median number of daily visits to the ED decreased by 18 visits per day since the declaration of public health guidelines (interquartile range, 9-24, p < 0.001). This accounted for a 32% decrease in the total volume of ED visits in 2020 compared to prior years during the study period (p < 0.001). There was a 9% increase in the proportion of primary diagnoses considered urgent (p = 0.002). The proportion of visits requiring urgent surgery increased by 39% (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: The total number of eye-specific ED visits dropped compared to prior years while the proportion of urgent visits increased. Patients were likely more reluctant to seek eye care, deferring less urgent evaluation.