Female Representation in Pediatric Ophthalmology at the American Academy of Ophthalmology Annual Meeting From 2018 to 2022.

PURPOSE: To identify trends in female pediatric ophthalmologist authorship and representation at the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) Annual Meeting from 2018 to 2022. METHODS: Participant data from 2018 to 2022 were collected from the AAO website, organized by conference activity (papers, posters, instruction courses, videos, symposia, subspecialty day, and awards), and analyzed by sex using an online tool. Chi-squared and odds ratio analyses were performed to determine trends in authorship sex and associations between the sex of paper and poster authors in each category. RESULTS: Of 923 pediatric ophthalmology presentations from 2018 to 2022, 46.2% (426 of 923) of presenters and 46.6% (281 of 603) of unique individual participants were women. Overall, 48% (174 of 362) of first and senior authors of papers and posters were women. No significant difference or association between female first and female senior authors was observed (52% vs 44%, P = .14; odds ratio 1.59, P = .13). There was no significant change in the proportion of total female presenters from 2018 to 2019 (-3.09%, P = .53), 2019 to 2020 (0.76%, P = .88), 2020 to 2021 (9.09%, P = .09), 2021 to 2022 (-5.68%, P = .30), or 2018 to 2022 (1.08%, P = .84). CONCLUSIONS: Since 2018, female representation at the AAO Annual Meeting has remained consistent and nears 50%. The lack of a significant difference between the proportion of female first and senior authors suggests that junior female pediatric ophthalmologists are climbing the ranks and more broadly engaging in mentorship roles. Considering the increasing proportion of female pediatric ophthalmologists, the absence of corollary, statistically significant increases in female participation may be of concern. [J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 20XX;X(X):XX-XX.].

Hemi- and Central Retinal Vein Occlusion Associated with COVID-19 Infection in Young Patients without Known Risk Factors.

PURPOSE: Venous thromboembolic complications have been reported in association with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. We raised awareness regarding a potential temporal association between COVID-19 infection and retinal vein occlusion (RVO). DESIGN: Multicenter, retrospective, nonconsecutive case series. SUBJECTS: Patients presenting with hemi-RVO (HRVO) or central RVO (CRVO) between March 2020 and March 2021, with confirmed COVID-19 infection, were included. The exclusion criteria were as follows: age >50 years, hypertension, diabetes, glaucoma, obesity, underlying hypercoagulable states, and those requiring intubation during hospitalization. METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective, nonconsecutive case series including patients presenting with hemi-RVO (HRVO) or central RVO (CRVO) between March 2020 and March 2021, with confirmed COVID-19 infection. The exclusion criteria were as follows: age >50 years, hypertension, diabetes, glaucoma, obesity, underlying hypercoagulable states, and those requiring intubation during hospitalization. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ophthalmic findings, including presenting and final visual acuity (VA), imaging findings, and clinical course. RESULTS: Twelve eyes of 12 patients with CRVO (9 of 12) or HRVO (3 of 12) after COVID-19 infection were included. The median age was 32 years (range, 18-50 years). Three patients were hospitalized, but none were intubated. The median time from COVID-19 diagnosis to ophthalmic symptoms was 6.9 weeks. The presenting VA ranged from 20/20 to counting fingers, with over half (7 of 12) having a VA of ≥20/40. OCT revealed macular edema in 42% of the eyes; of these, 80% (4 of 5) were treated with anti-VEGF injections. Ninety-two percent (11 of 12) had partial or complete resolution of ocular findings at final follow-up. Four eyes (33%) had retinal thinning, as determined using OCT, by the end of the study interval. The final VA ranged from 20/20 to 20/60, with 11 of the 12 (92%) eyes achieving a VA of ≥20/40 at a median final follow-up period of 13 weeks (range, 4-52 weeks). CONCLUSIONS: Although we acknowledge the high seroprevalence of COVID-19 and that a causal relationship cannot be established, we reported this series to raise awareness regarding the potential risk of retinal vascular events due to a heightened thromboinflammatory state associated with COVID-19 infection.

Patient Understanding of Nonapproved Stem Cell Therapies for Retinal Disease.

This prospective survey study demonstrates a lack of retina clinic patient knowledge about appropriate stem cell therapy applications for retinal disease.

Rationale for American Society of Retina Specialists Best Practice Recommendations for Conducting Vitreoretinal Surgery during the COVID-19 Era.

PURPOSE: To detail the rationale behind recommendations recently published by the American Society of Retina Specialists (ASRS) outlining best practices for safety of vitreoretinal surgeons and staff while performing vitreoretinal surgery during the coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic. METHODS: The committee for ASRS Best Practices for Retinal Surgery during the COVID-19 Pandemic reviewed existing evidence and information on SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and risk factors during vitreoretinal surgery. Recommendations were based on best available published data, cumulative clinical experiences, and recommendations and policies from other organizations. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the strength of recommendations and confidence in the evidence. These serve as interim recommendations which are routinely updated given gaps of knowledge and lack of high-quality data on this evolving subject. RESULTS: Relevant existing literature related to methods of transmission, and ocular manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 are summarized. The data and clinical experiences driving recommendations for pre-operative, intraoperative and post-operative surgical considerations, anesthesia choice, as well as considerations for intravitreal injections are provided. CONCLUSION: Recommendations are provided with the goal of protecting vitreoretinal surgeons and associated personnel from exposure to SARS-CoV-2 during interventional vitreoretinal procedures. This is a rapidly evolving topic with numerous remaining gaps in our current knowledge. As such, recommendations will evolve and the current manuscript is intended to serve as a foundation for continued dialogue on best practices.

Ophthalmology Residency Match in the Covid-19 Era: Applicant and Program Director Perceptions of the 2020-2021 Application Cycle.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the experiences and preferences of ophthalmology residency applicants and program directors (PDs), with emphasis on the effect of COVID-19 as well as recent changes on the application process. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, online survey. PARTICIPANTS: All applicants to the Bascom Palmer Eye Institute ophthalmology residency program, and all United States ophthalmology residency PDs, during the 2020-2021 application cycle. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to applicants and program directors of the 2020-2021 ophthalmology residency application cycle.Main Outcome Measures: Applicant demographics, application submissions, interview experiences, financial considerations, match results, and suggestions for improvement of the application process. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 205 applicants (34.9% response rate) and 37 PDs (30.3%). A successful match into an ophthalmology residency was achieved by 144 (83.7%) applicants. Applicants applied to (mean ± SD) 79.7 ± 22.8 ophthalmology residency programs, received 13.1 ± 8.9 invitations to interview, and attended 11.1 ± 5.8 interviews. Most applicants (N = 126; 71.2%) and PDs (N = 22; 78.6%) expressed a preference for in-person interviews over virtual interviews. If given a choice regarding the future direction for interviews, most applicants were unsure (N = 68; 38.4%) or would prefer to hold interviews virtually (N = 62; 35.0%); PDs felt that interviews should go back to being in-person (39.3%) or were unsure (28.6%). Most PDs (N = 21; 72.4%) reported an increased number of applications received by their respective programs this year compared to previous years. While applicants (N = 108; 61.0%) mostly felt that there should not be a cap on the number of applications, 19 (67.9%) PDs supported a limit on application numbers. Applicants spent an average (SD) of $2320.96 ($1172.86) on the application process this year, which is significantly less than 2018-2019 data. CONCLUSIONS: The ophthalmology residency application process was especially complex during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although many applicants and PDs were glad that interviews were held virtually this year, they were less certain regarding future years. The virtual format led to a significantly lower financial burden for applicants and may lead some to prefer this format in the future; if a hybrid model is offered for virtual/in-person interviews, these two interview modes should be compared equally.

Impact of the coronavirus pandemic on pediatric eye-related emergency department services.

Literature describing the trends and utilization of pediatric eye-related emergency department (ED) visits is limited. We performed a retrospective cohort study of 311 pediatric patients visiting Bascom Palmer Eye Institute (BPEI) ED between March and May 2020 to quantify the effect of the coronavirus (COVID-19) on ophthalmology care utilization. In our study, pediatric ED visits declined by half at the onset of the pandemic in March. The number of visits reached the lowest point in early April and increased to 48% of the pre-COVID volume by the end of May. Despite changes in volume, patient demographics and clinical diagnoses were relatively consistent throughout the pandemic.

Emergent Ophthalmic Surgical Care at a Tertiary Referral Center During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: This study characterized the delivery of emergent ophthalmic surgical care during April 2020 of the coronarvirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic compared with the same interval the previous year. DESIGN: Retrospective observational before-and-after study. METHODS: This study reviewed and characterized each emergent and/or urgent procedure performed during April 2020 and April 2019 at a single tertiary ophthalmology referral center. Information collected included the details of patient presentation, diagnosis, surgical procedure, and preoperative COVID-19 testing. RESULTS: In total, 117 surgical procedures were performed on 114 patients during the month of April 2020 compared with 1,107 performed in April 2019 (P < .0001). Retinal detachment repair was the most common procedure (n = 37; 31.6%) in April 2020, whereas elective cataract surgery (n = 481; 47.3%) was the most common procedure in April 2019. The mean age of patients was 50.0 years in April 2020 compared with 59.0 years (P < .0001) the previous year. During April 2020, the mean age of surgeons performing procedures was 42.3 years compared with 48.4 years (P < .0001) during April 2019. In April 2020, all but 5 patients (96%) had reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction based COVID-19 testing before their procedure. One patient (0.88%) had a positive COVID-19 test. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic decreased our institution's surgical volume in April 2020 to approximately 10% of the usual volume. The pandemic changed the type of cases performed and led to a statistically significant decrease in both the age of our surgeons and patients relative to the same interval in the previous year. Broad preoperative screening led to 1 positive COVID-19 test in an asymptomatic patient.

Practice Patterns and Responsiveness to Simulated Common Ocular Complaints Among US Ophthalmology Centers During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

IMPORTANCE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has drastically changed how comprehensive ophthalmology practices care for patients. OBJECTIVE: To report practice patterns for common ocular complaints during the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic among comprehensive ophthalmology practices in the US. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this cross-sectional study, 40 private practices and 20 university centers were randomly selected from 4 regions across the US. Data were collected on April 29 and 30, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Investigators placed telephone calls to each ophthalmology practice office. Responses to 3 clinical scenarios-refraction request, cataract evaluation, and symptoms of a posterior vitreous detachment-were compared regionally and between private and university centers. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary measure was time to next appointment for each of the 3 scenarios. Secondary measures included use of telemedicine and advertisement of COVID-19 precautions. RESULTS: Of the 40 private practices, 2 (5%) were closed, 24 (60%) were only seeing urgent patients, and 14 (35%) remained open to all patients. Of the 20 university centers, 2 (10%) were closed, 17 (85%) were only seeing urgent patients, and 1 (5%) remained open to all patients. There were no differences for any telemedicine metric. University centers were more likely than private practices to mention preparations to limit the spread of COVID-19 (17 of 20 [85%] vs 14 of 40 [35%]; mean difference, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.26-0.65; P < .001). Private practices had a faster next available appointment for cataract evaluations than university centers, with a mean (SD) time to visit of 22.1 (27.0) days vs 75.5 (46.1) days (mean difference, 53.4; 95% CI, 23.1-83.7; P < .001). Private practices were also more likely than university centers to be available to see patients with flashes and floaters (30 of 40 [75%] vs 8 of 20 [40%]; mean difference, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.22-0.79; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cross-sectional study of investigator telephone calls to ophthalmology practice offices, there were uniform recommendations for the 3 routine ophthalmic complaints. Private practices had shorter times to next available appointment for cataract extraction and were more likely to evaluate posterior vitreous detachment symptoms. As there has not been a study examining these practice patterns before the COVID-19 pandemic, the relevance of these findings on public health is yet to be determined.

Ophthalmology conferences in the coronavirus disease 2019 era.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss key considerations involved in adapting an in-person ophthalmology conference to a virtual medium. RECENT FINDINGS: In 2020, several ophthalmological societies have held or are planning to hold virtual conferences in lieu of their previously scheduled in-person ophthalmology conference because of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The strategic meeting components attempted to be retained in these transitions include educational information disseminating, academic discussion with colleagues, sponsorships, and networking. Live-streamed components of a virtual conference may be entirely real time or may include a combination of both prerecorded and live-streamed components. A virtual meeting may offer either a single live-streamed program or several concurrent live-streamed programs from which attendees can choose. The availability of on-demand content, mechanisms for audience participation, avenues for industry interaction and contribution, registration costs, and continuing medical education credit availability vary between virtual meeting formats. SUMMARY: Transition of an in-person ophthalmology conference to a virtual format with retention of the inherent value associated with the meeting is possible and the experiences of societies executing this adaptation can be helpful for others entering this space. There are numerous considerations regarding meeting format and logistics to contemplate in light of each meeting's specific audience and objectives.

Teleophthalmology: an essential tool in the era of the novel coronavirus 2019.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this article is to assess the current state of teleophthalmology given the sudden surge in telemedicine demand in response to the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). RECENT FINDINGS: Recommendations and policies from government and national health organizations, combined with social distancing, have led to exponential increases in telemedicine use. Teleophthalmology can be integrated into ophthalmic care delivery. In the emergency room, teleophthalmology can be utilized to triage patients and diagnose common ophthalmic eye diseases. Ophthalmology practices can utilize real-time medicine to conduct many parts of an in-person exam. In cases where more complex diagnostic tools are warranted, a model incorporating telemedicine and focused in-person visits may still be beneficial. Innovative technologies emerging in the market allow for increased remote monitoring, screening, and management of adult and pediatric patients for common eye diseases. SUMMARY: COVID-19 created a demand for healthcare delivery that limits in-person examination and potential viral exposure. Teleophthalmology allows ophthalmologists to continue caring for patients while keeping physicians and patients safe. Although challenges still exist, the pandemic has accelerated the adoption of teleophthalmology. As a result, teleophthalmology will play an integral role in providing high-quality efficient care in the near future.